You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: Culture Wars
Must Read: Diana West drives a stake through the heart of Multiculturalism
2007-03-17

Hat tip to Jihad Watch

Mods: I searched on Diana West and did not find this recent article. If this has been posted here already, please feel free to delete it.

All: This is a must read. Perhaps one of West's finest articles, she nails squarely the left's fatal fascination with Multiculturalism.


Burnt offerings on the altar of multiculturalism

Only one faith on Earth may be more messianic than Islam: multiculturalism. Without it — without its fanatics who believe all civilizations are the same — the engine that projects Islam into the unprotected heart of Western civilization would stall and fail. It’s as simple as that. To live among the believers — the multiculturalists — is to watch the assault, the jihad, take place un-repulsed by our suicidal societies. These societies are not doomed to submit; rather, they are eager to do so in the name of a masochistic brand of tolerance that, short of drastic measures, is surely terminal.I’m not talking about our soldiers, policemen, rescue workers and, now, even train conductors, who bravely and steadfastly risk their lives for civilization abroad and at home. Instead, I’m thinking about who we are as a society at this somewhat advanced stage of war. It is a strange, tentative civilization we have become, with leaders who strut their promises of “no surrender” even as they flinch at identifying the foe. Four years past 9/11, we continue to shadow-box “terror,” even as we go on about “an ideology of hate.” It’s a script that smacks of sci-fi fantasy more than realpolitik. But our grim reality is no summer blockbuster, and there’s no special-effects-enhanced plot twist that is going to thwart “terror” or “hate” in the London Underground anymore than it did on the roof of the World Trade Center. Or in the Bali nightclub. Or on the first day of school in Beslan. Or in any disco, city bus or shopping mall in Israel.

Body bags, burn masks and prosthetics are no better protections than make-believe. But these are our weapons, according to the powers that be. These, and an array of high-tech scopes and scanners designed to identify retinas and fingerprints, to detect explosives and metals — ultimately, I presume, as we whisk through the automatic supermarket door. How strange, though, that even as we devise new ways to see inside ourselves to our most elemental components, we also prevent ourselves from looking full-face at the danger to our way of life posed by Islam.

Notice I didn’t say “Islamists.” Or “Islamofascists.” Or “fundamentalist extremists.” I’ve tried out such terms in the past, but I’ve come to find them artificial and confusing, and maybe purposefully so, because in their imprecision I think they allow us all to give a wide berth to a great problem: the gross incompatibility of Islam — the religious force that shrinks freedom even as it “moderately” enables or “extremistly” advances jihad — with the West. Am I right? Who’s to say? The very topic of Islamization — for that is what is at hand, and very soon in Europe — is verboten.

A leaked British report prepared for Prime Minister Tony Blair last year warned even against “expressions of concern about Islamic fundamentalism” (another one of those amorphous terms) because “many perfectly moderate Muslims follow strict adherence to traditional Islamic teachings and are likely to perceive such expressions as a negative comment on their own approach to their faith.” Much better to watch subterranean tunnels fill with charred body parts in silence. As the London Times’ Simon Jenkins wrote, “The sane response to urban terrorism is to regard it as an avoidable accident.”

In not discussing the roots of terror in Islam itself, in not learning about them, the multicultural clergy that shepherds our elites prevents us from having to do anything about them. This is key, because any serious action — stopping immigration from jihad-sponsoring nations, shutting down mosques that preach violence and expelling their imams, just for starters — means to renounce the multicultural creed. In the West, that’s the greatest apostasy. And while the penalty is not death — as it is for leaving Islam under Islamic law — the existential crisis is to be avoided at all costs. Including extinction.

This is the lesson of the atrocities in London. It’s unlikely that the 21st century will remember that this new Western crossroads for global jihad was once the home of Churchill, Piccadilly and Sherlock Holmes. Then again, who will notice? The BBC has retroactively purged its online bombing coverage of the word “terrorist”; the spokesman for the London police commissioner has declared that “Islam and terrorism simply don’t go together”; and within sight of a forensics team sifting through rubble, an Anglican priest urged his flock, as The Guardian reported, to “rejoice in the capital’s rich diversity of cultures, traditions, ethnic groups and faiths.” Just don’t, he said, “name them as Muslims.” Their faith renewed, Londoners soldier on.

While honest ethnic diversity and Multiculturalism once served America well, there is far too much political and Politically Correct baggage attached to the modern interpretation of Multiculturalism for it to remain totally unscathed. This once useful concept has become severely damaged goods. It is much like the current situation with Muslim immigration. Not all Muslims arriving are full blown terrorists. Yet, far too many of them pose a sufficient problem whereby their entry into America must cease. I believe quite firmly that America's original strength and final position atop this world's political food chain devolved from the huge diversity within our society. That said, diversity now has a rather different meaning to the Multiculturalists.

Too much of Multiculturalism has the now exclusive goal of undermining or displacing white Christian America at any price. At this one group’s almost singular expense — in both consumption of taxpayer dollars and demographically — the United States is being flooded with the underprivileged and economically disadvantaged of almost every nation on earth, including many of those which hate America most fiercely. In an insidious attempt to overthrow democracy and free market capitalism, Multiculturalists are attempting to counterbalance traditional American voting patterns by introducing far more malleable and easily manipulated constituents. This repackaged and rebranded Multiculturalism is nothing but sedition-lite. Those who hate America have not been able to curtail free speech and thought to a sufficient degree, even with their most powerful weapon, Political Correctness. Their hatred of democracy runs so deep that they are now attempting to subvert it and all free discussion of it by, as Diana West so capably observes, by projecting “Islam into the unprotected heart of Western civilization”. And it is not just Islam. As noted above, we are being inundated with marginally skilled semi-literate backward types from every two-bit backwater third world country on earth.

How are these newcomers supposed to help drive the technologically sophisticated industrial engine that powers AmericaÂ’s increasingly beleaguered economy? How are these people going to integrate into a society so advanced as to be almost an alien civilization by comparison to their own origins? What the Multiculturalists refuse to admit, at least not openly, is that theyÂ’re not supposed to at all.

Unable to adequately muffle free speech or thought with Political Correctness and its Orwellian Newspeak, instead they are flooding America with those most susceptible to the sort of socialist and communist doctrine espoused by Multiculturalists. Look around the world at where communist insurgencies currently make their biggest inroads. They are always made amongst the poor and barely literate who see no problem with redistributing wealth or land that they will never legitimately obtain in their lifetimes.

With the Soviet UnionÂ’s collapse, more educated populations are no longer so easily persuaded that centrally planned government is the universal panacea Multiculturalists say it is. Unable to sway AmericaÂ’s own existing citizenry with their tissue of lies, they now seek to import those who can be gulled into accepting this intensely flawed doctrine. They do not care one whit if those they let loose among us have little motivation to integrate or even participate. All the better, if it ensures that AmericaÂ’s core of traditional values are eroded and undermined. Multiculturalists have no compunctions over delivering us into the hands of even the most vicious and barbaric sort of Neanderthals, just so long as it assists their overthrow of our precious constitutional law.

The liberal left’s carefully masked elitism permits them to smugly think that, once democracy has been destroyed, only they will have the intelligence to assume real power. This is the well-hidden racism that taints so much of liberal doctrine. It is most often found in those who smarmily deplore the condition of our “little brown brothers”. What they do not realize is that by infiltrating America with this world’s thugs and human backwash, they are sowing the hydra’s teeth. They do this without consideration of how that which springs forth from America’s subverted soil will have almost limitless freedom to savage our population, them included. Especially so the liberals as they have voluntarily relinquished their right to bear arms and will be the most defenseless of all.

This is self-loathing and its inherent cognitive dissonance, writ large on an unbelievable scale. By subverting democracyÂ’s protective umbrella they stand unsheltered from the very deluge they seed. Unarmed, the left fecklessly breeds up anti-American demons of a sort never seen before. Their self-loathing has begun to assume suicidal proportions. Just as how the leftÂ’s depraved brand of tolerance seeks to expiate their perceived sins with our own blood. As Diana West points out:
To live among the believers -- the multiculturalists -- is to watch the assault, the jihad, take place un-repulsed by our suicidal societies. These societies are not doomed to submit; rather, they are eager to do so in the name of a masochistic brand of tolerance that, short of drastic measures, is surely terminal.
The liberal left has gone terminal. In its rebellion against all things American, their moral compass is now demagnetized. Its needle drifts aimlessly, much as does their social agenda and political platform. In seeking to please the malcontents with which they have purposefully infected this country, their policy has become poison.
Posted by:Zenster

#24  er....I think the posted article was pretty good. yep.. pretty good.........I'll just get back in my box now......
Posted by: Bunyip   2007-03-17 20:26  

#23  "...represents bad faith on your part. Please feel free to back up your statements by citing any post of mine that says..."

ENOUGH!!!!

Stop. NOW.

Posted by: Dave D.   2007-03-17 20:02  

#22  So, how do you tell a good muzzie from a bad muzzie ? Itchy trigger fingers want to know.
If you hear someone say Allah Ackbar, and you turn and see a bearded man with an AK-47, what do you do ? What if he's wearing a bulging vest or holding a garage door opener ? Oh, that's right, you leave it for the police to take care of, like they do the rapes in Sweden, you know the unreported rapes and the ones where they print 'students rape girl', rather than 'Muslims rape girl'. If government has proven anyything it is that they are never ready to react in kind to evil.
First they will debate it. (the debate should have started years ago)
Then they will fund it. (the public has already taken building border fencing into their own hands)
Then they will appoint a director. (are you vomiting yet ? I am)
Posted by: wxjames   2007-03-17 19:50  

#21  I really wish you'd take the (actually) courageous step and get your own damn website
Posted by: Frank G   2007-03-17 19:45  

#20  Zenster, what part of "Muslim holocaust" (your words) do you not understand?
Posted by: Darrell   2007-03-17 19:43  

#19  Frank, you still neglect to reconcile my consistent opposition to any first use of nuclear weapons against Islam with your accusations that I advocate a "nuke 'em all" policy. Your failure to do so represents bad faith on your part. Please feel free to back up your statements by citing any post of mine that says "nuke 'em all" or the direct equivalent. Your resorting to name calling is both unbecoming and puerile.
Posted by: Zenster   2007-03-17 19:40  

#18  It speaks rather ill of your capacity for making rational judgements.

Zen, your flamboyant return is less than rejoiceful on my part. Your rhetoric is tiresome, repetitive, uninfluential, and typically overblown. You disparage all who disagree and fluff your own pillow. I just might ask .com to come back and hand you your ass again. Pipe down, punk
Posted by: Frank G   2007-03-17 19:22  

#17  What part of:

IslamÂ’s decentralized nature and abject refusal to abandon terrorism literally guarantees that, one day in the not too distant future, some radical Islamic splinter group will commit an atrocity of such monstrous proportions that a stunned West will have no other recourse than to initiate the Muslim holocaust.

- do you not understand, Frank? That isn't "nuke 'em all" language. Can you somehow wrap your brain around that fact? It is a simple observation that Islam is hell bent on its own destruction and, left unchecked, it will happen.

I DO NOT advocate the annihilation of all Muslim majority countries, I merely predict that it is something that will likely happen. Go read the Three Conjectures one more time if any of this is unclear.

At some point Islam will deploy a nuclear weapon or weapons against the West. When that happens, it is highly probable that Wretchard's predictions will all come true with lightning swiftness.

How are you able to ignore the single fact that I have routinely criticized and vociferously argued against ANY first use of nuclear weapons against our Islamic enemies. You steadfastly ignore that basic fact while you, and others, continue to try and tar me with the "nuke 'em all" brush.

It speaks rather ill of your capacity for making rational judgements.
Posted by: Zenster   2007-03-17 18:29  

#16  I expect he'll answer that at about 11:58.
Posted by: Darrell   2007-03-17 17:32  

#15  Round 47 - I give to Darrell. Zen, you know the issues as well as anyone, why do you persist in the "nuke em all" shit?
Posted by: Frank G   2007-03-17 17:19  

#14  "a stunned West will have no other recourse than to initiate the Muslim holocaust"
Yeah, Zenster, just like we had to exterminate every last Japanese and German civilian in WWII. I note the way you slip your future genocide in as an inevitabilty. It's a shame -- it degrades your overall case against Islamic fanatics because it paints you to be a homicidal fanatic too. Try to rise above Lord of the Flies.
Posted by: Darrell   2007-03-17 17:02  

#13  whatadeal, I understand your intent but am obliged to observe that in the particular case of Muslims, your optimism is unmerited. AmericaÂ’s second major wave of immigration during the post Civil War eras saw the vast majority of arrivals proud to assimilate into this nationÂ’s collective culture. Some even refused to teach their children anything but English so as to better prepare them for life here. Despite encountering a degree of enclave mentality (e.g., China Town, Little Italy, etc.), there was an overall recognition that AmericaÂ’s government and multicultural society was superior to that which they had left.

Such is no longer the case. Many new arrivals to our shores have no intention of integrating into modern American society. It is not just the Muslims either. The Hispanic Barrio is stronger than ever and continues to demand government acceptance of bilingual education with Spanish as a second language. All of this is driven, if not inspired, by MulticulturalismÂ’s pervasive influence and tacit acceptance in so many political offices. In FjorddmanÂ’s typically excellent article about Glossocracy (i.e., the manipulation and intentional distortion of language for political gain), he lays bare the weapons of Multiculturalism.
Besides, those who praise diversity the most are frequently those who are the least tolerant of diverging opinions. As British newspaper columnist Richard Littlejohn puts it: “The Fascist Left have turned the Nanny State into the Bully State. There is no limit to their intolerance in the name of tolerance.”

“Tolerance” has been defined as support for Multiculturalism and continued mass immigration. Tolerance thus means that Western populations should eradicate themselves and their own culture. It means a slow-motion surrender to Islamic culture and Islamic rule. Yet if you are against tolerance you must be some kind of evil racist or something. Who doesn’t like tolerance and diversity?
Indeed, if tolerance and diversity are to simultaneously lead us into cultural suicide, as also noted by Diana West, then such aims are a perversion of Western ideals.

In short, if the states are our "laboratories of democracy" as the Founding Fathers put it, Massachusetts is an experiment to see how making America just like Europe would work. And like Europe, the most visible aspect of cultural Marxism - aggressive multiculturalism - is turning the state into something distinctly non-Western.

Evidently so, no mo uro. Look no further than the Roxbury mosque debacle for proof of what you say. I refer everyone to todayÂ’s posting titled, Boston: Islamic group sues scholar for libeling Muslims. The article and comments that follow reveal much that should be cause for concern.

Te tell the truth, I'm not nearly so concerned that halal slaughtering is slow and cruel, as that it apparently has no standards for cleanliness and hygiene, and its practitioners seem to feel no need to comply with extant laws on the subject -- leading to unhealthy food being foisted on an unsuspecting public. Especially as halal is generally presented as the Muslim version of kosher, which actually enforces a higher standard of cleanliness and purity than the secular law.

trailing wife, with all due respect, I think that it is vital for Americans to begin holding Islam to the letter of American law. By getting Halal slaughter (consisting of slitting an animalÂ’s throat and letting it bleed to death without anesthesia), declared as inhumane treatment of animals, we can begin taking major strides towards making America Islam-unfriendly. Banning the burqa and niqab as disguises that create security risks would be another easy step in this process.

I have danced around the idea of what to call the evil put upon us on 9/11. I have used the term islamofacist and other terms to distinguish the good muslims from the evil ones. Maybe that distinction is not necessary. After all, did we distinguish "good" communists from "bad" communitsts during the cold war. Such distinctions may be self-defeating and another reflection of multiculturalism and PC.

So have I, JohnQC. Anyone who has traced the evolution of my own attitudes towards Islam since joining this board will know that I was once a staunch defender of moderate Muslims and assiduously distinguished between Islam and Islamists. Somehow, I managed to leave out a vital part of my original posting. Just as Diana West so capably notes, I too now refuse to make any distinction between Islamofascism, Islamists, Islamic fundamentalism, Islamic radicals, Islamic extremism or whatever other adjectives and modifiers you wish to concoct for this vile cult. All of it is Islam and all Muslims help to drive this totalitarian ideology.

Over five years of deafening silence from the global Muslim community stands in mute testimony to this basic fact. Even something so encouraging as the St. Petersburg Declaration is simply too little too late. It is cruel irony to note, exactly as extremist critics of this declaration do as well, that a majority of those empanelled to make this declaration are not themselves Muslims and instead are apostates. I am also obliged to note that: Nowhere in the entire document is there a universal, categorical and unequivocal condemnation of terrorism. Again, simply too little too late.

In the end we must annihilate them, unconditionally. To do less will be an invitation for them to regroup for yet another war against civilization. We should try to save the children and unbrainwash the if we can.

wxjames, my own take on this is slightly different. As if lifted straight out of some ancient Greek tragedy, Islam literally foredooms itself to obliteration. As Wretchard so presciently notes in his fine essay, The Three Conjectures:
At this point, a United States choked with corpses could still not negotiate an end to hostilities or deter further attacks. There would be no one to call on the Red Telephone, even to surrender to. In fact, there exists no competent Islamic authority, no supreme imam who could stop a jihad on behalf of the whole Muslim world. Even if the terror chiefs could somehow be contacted in this apocalyptic scenario and persuaded to bury the hatchet, the lack of command and control imposed by the cell structure would prevent them from reining in their minions. Due to the fixity of intent, attacks would continue for as long as capability remained. Under these circumstances, any American government would eventually be compelled by public desperation to finish the exchange by entering -1 x 10^9 in the final right hand column: total retaliatory extermination.

The so-called strengths of Islamic terrorism: fanatical intent; lack of a centralized leadership; absence of a final authority and cellular structure guarantee uncontrollable escalation once the nuclear threshold is crossed. Therefore the 'rational' American response to the initiation of terrorist WMD attack would be all out retaliation from the outset.
IslamÂ’s decentralized nature and abject refusal to abandon terrorism literally guarantees that, one day in the not too distant future, some radical Islamic splinter group will commit an atrocity of such monstrous proportions that a stunned West will have no other recourse than to initiate the Muslim holocaust.

I want to thank everyone who read WestÂ’s essay. I think she clearly articulates the real threat being posed. Someone elsewhere once noted how Islam is not the true peril, it is but an opportunistic virus than can only kill an already weakened host. Political Correctness and Multiculturalism are nothing less than a crippling AIDS infection that allows us to be finished off by something we could normally repulse, like Islam.
Posted by: Zenster   2007-03-17 16:43  

#12  One aspect that I don't see mentioned but is definitely there is pure laziness of much of the world.

Under the guise of multiculturalism, one can be lazy and not deal with problems. Chalk things up to 'that is the way they are, and we must respect all views' and we can rush off to our 5 star catered luncheon and avoid having to really work at things.

So yes we have the confluence of many things, but I see a simpler root issue, being that most humans on the planet will do anything to avoid having to think too much about something.

Multiculturalism provides the perfect vehicle and tool to avoid doing anything about problems, whilst giving the ability to claim some perceived pinnacle of thought. It allows laziness to be not just acceptable, but preferred.
Posted by: bombay   2007-03-17 12:53  

#11  Frank G, I knew it wasn't Lamarr Alexander.
My comment was just poken fun.
Posted by: wxjames   2007-03-17 12:17  

#10  Whatadeal, may I remind you that Pakistani muslims migrated to England where they had and raised children. Some of those children blew up trains and buses in London a couple of years ago.
It's not the people, it's the 'religion', Islam.
The parents had a dream to pursue, the children lost their way in a university. I can only deduce that Islam is evil and one must cut all ties to Islam to assure peace and prosperity in his life.
Posted by: wxjames   2007-03-17 12:15  

#9  I believe DepotGuy was quoting Hedley "Not Hedy" Lamarr
Posted by: Frank G   2007-03-17 12:06  

#8  DepotGuy, don't miss your meds.
Myself, Zenster, and others have been defining this enemy as Islam for years now. I always knew the pack would come around, not because I can fortell such things, but it is so clear that no muzzie is a good muzzie. We are not alone, rather joined by many who escaped the tyranny of Islam like Brigitte Gabriel and Waffa Sultan. It is high time that we of western civilization listen to those with first hand knowledge of evil Islam and end the feel good rhetoric. Some wonder how we could possibly be headed for an Armageddon, but this slow realization is exactly what emboldens the cavemen and causes little and late responces to their evil activities.
In the end we must annihilate them, unconditionally. To do less will be an invitation for them to regroup for yet another war against civilization. We should try to save the children and unbrainwash the if we can.
Posted by: wxjames   2007-03-17 12:01  

#7  "What they do not realize is that by infiltrating America with this worldÂ’s thugs and human backwash, they are sowing the hydraÂ’s teeth."

I've decided to launch an attack that will reduce Rock Ridge to ashes...I want you to round up every vicious criminal and gunslinger in the West. Take this down: I want rustlers, cut-throats, murderers, bounty hunters, desperadoes, mugs, pugs, thugs, nit-wits, half-wits, dim-wits, vipers, snipers, con-men, Indian agents, Mexican bandits, muggers, buggerers, bush-whackers, horn-swagglers, horse-thieves, bull-dykes, train-robbers, bank-robbers, ass-kickers, shit-kickers, and Methodists!
Posted by: DepotGuy   2007-03-17 10:52  

#6  Zenster, right on target. All civilizations are not the same. Some are not even civil. Others are downright evil. If all civilizations were reduced to the same under multiculturalism, then it would not make any difference where multicultural espousing liberals lived. I don't think they really believe that which is then hypocrisy. The other alternative is that their approach is a chickenshit appeasement way of dealing with the world which any thinking person long ago realized doesn't work.

I have danced around the idea of what to call the evil put upon us on 9/11. I have used the term islamofacist and other terms to distinguish the good muslims from the evil ones. Maybe that distinction is not necessary. After all, did we distinguish "good" communists from "bad" communitsts during the cold war. Such distinctions may be self-defeating and another reflection of multiculturalism and PC. That claptrap is going to ruin our civilization, culture, and way of life. Maybe murder, oppression and destruction are built into "the religion of peace" in a Jim Jones kind of way and it is this religion that should be our enemy.
Posted by: JohnQC   2007-03-17 10:16  

#5  When I interviewed for a position with a major American company with branches in all major East Coast cities, I told my prospective employer right up front that I would not even consider working anyplace north of Virginia. When asked why, I told them that I refused to pay the extortionate blue state taxes or live under their anti-2nd Amendment state governments. They seemed to understand that stance pretty easily and had no problem with satisfying my requirements.

Anyone who does business in Massachusetts that isn't absolutely forced to is nuts. I don't think Deval Patrick is competent to walk my dog, much less run a state, and he's worked assiduously to validate my belief. Why any productive citizens continue to live in that liberal garbage dump, I can't imagine.
Posted by: Mac   2007-03-17 08:22  

#4  Te tell the truth, I'm not nearly so concerned that halal slaughtering is slow and cruel, as that it apparently has no standards for cleanliness and hygiene, and its practitioners seem to feel no need to comply with extant laws on the subject -- leading to unhealthy food being foisted on an unsuspecting public. Especially as halal is generally presented as the Muslim version of kosher, which actually enforces a higher standard of cleanliness and purity than the secular law.

But I think whatadeal expressed the general idea so neatly that I won't waste time restating it.
Posted by: trailing wife   2007-03-17 07:56  

#3  Great article and better comments, Zenster.

The fascination of the Democrats (and many RINOs) with making the U.S. into a society not meaningfully different than postmodern Europe is on display in Massachusetts.

There we have the same triune that made the multi-culti, postmodern, collectivist, anti-Christian hellhole of Europe working right here in one of our own states -

1. union thugs more concerned about having perfect income security provided by an outside agency (usually the government),

2. an academic/intellectual elite bent on attacking capitalism and Judeo-Christian values and promoting cultural and economic Marxsim, and

3. trust-fund trash who only know how to protect their wealth instead of generating more.

This confluence has resulted in a state government which is over 80% Democrat, the remining part being mostly RINO's, thus creating a virtual one-party political class.

The state is chronically in debt, has a tax burden (particularly on productivity and property) which is among the highest in the nation and growing, is being overrun by illegal aliens in a way that is finally starting to get national notice, is hostile towards religion with the occasional exception for the union thugs' religion of choice (Catholicism) and, of course, Islam, is driving out business both small and large (fifty Fortune 500 companies in the state in 1980, twelve today), and is not with the program as far as defense of our borders and the WoT are concerned.

In short, if the states are our "laboratories of democracy" as the Founding Fathers put it, Massachusetts is an experiment to see how making America just like Europe would work. And like Europe, the most visible aspect of cultural Marxism - aggressive multiculturalism - is turning the state into something distinctly non-Western.

To those who would see what a collectivist, multicultural society would look like, we no longer have to look to Euroland. We have our own Europe-lite right here on this side of the Atlantic.
Posted by: no mo uro   2007-03-17 07:45  

#2  We are headed on the way to a system where Muslims will get daily time off with pay, so that they can pray. And unless this is stopped, employers will have to shell out billions for Muslim work space and special cleansing facilities. As was posted here, in the UK non-Muslims are forced to eat meat that has been slow killed in the cruel Muslim manner, in order to accomodate Muslims. While we are doing this, Muslim majority tyrannies are ethnically cleansing disbelievers at an escalating pace.
Posted by: Sneaze   2007-03-17 02:15  

#1  Not all civilizations are equal, not all civilizations are good, and not all things in a civilization are good. Practioners of Islam in the U.S. came here, among other reasons, to get away from the nuts. If the U.S. is worth loving, then each of us will protect it from the nuts who want a civilization based on murder. I pray that those who brought their families over 10,000 miles from the Middle East to flee the nuts do not want their children to live that kind of life again. They will do what they think best, and I, my friends, my neighbors, and my countrymen will do what we think best.
Posted by: whatadeal   2007-03-17 01:08  

00:00