Sunday, May 26

Why do western politicians coddle Islamic terrorists?

For some months now I've been mulling over the puzzle of why every western government--I don't know of a single exception--keeps making excuses for Islamic terrorism, and resolutely avoids taking even the most delicate action that might begin to solve the problem.

Obama is the most extreme example of an appeasing western head of state, and is now pushing once again to close Gitmo and release all the detainees back to their home countries.  But other western leaders seem to be little different:  All of them--again, without exception--keep saying things like "Islam is not the enemy."  If that's true then the next phrase is perfectly logical:  "We are not at war with Islam."

Unfortunately, Islamic fundamentalists are at war with the west.  And not just the U.S.--Muslims are rioting in Sweden, murdering in France and the U.K and Boston, supporting terrorism in Canada.

One theory for the bizarre excuse-making by *some* western heads of state is that a few actually, secretly support Muslim terrorism and conquest.  While it's not hard to believe that about Obama--given his parents and his upbringing in Muslim Indonesia--it's hard to imagine that other western politicians are similarly traitorous.

So what's the reason?  I suspect a few are unwilling to call out Islam as the enemy simply out of pure fear.  But I suspect the largest contribution is simply stupidity:  Being products of modern schooling, one suspects most have little understanding of history before, say, 1850, so are literally unable to believe that Islamic leaders could possibly be serious about conquering the entire world for their religion.

Let me say that again:  Literally.  Unable to believe.

Example:  Most modern western heads of state don't seem to have strong religious leanings, so they have a hard time imagining that Islamic leaders can be serious about conquering for religious reasons.  When some radical imam starts screaming that democracy is anti-Islamic, or that music is anti-Islamic, or that women can't go out of the home unless accompanied by an adult male relative, us regular folks take 'em seriously, but our more sophisticated [?] politicians dismiss such talk as simply fire-breathing to keep the local rabble on the reservation.

See, the people we elect are so much smarter than the rest of us, so they just *know*stuff like that.  It's a gift us regular folks just don't have.

So let's predict how this will play out:  Your political leaders will keep doing what they've always done--making excuses for Islam, welcoming Muslim immigrants, bending over backward to avoid calling Islamic terrorism what it is.  Any minute now they'll start marshalling the power of the fine and jail citizens who rise *against* the terrorists and rioters.

This has already happened in both the UK and Sweden:  In the former a man was charged for "making anti-religious remarks" on Facebook.  As you could guess, the religion he was criticizing was Islam.

In Sweden the cops are arresting people protesting against the riots there.  Wholly crazy, but then that's modern political correctness for ya.

Muslims have found a sweet deal:  Come to a western country, bring all your wives and kids, get on the dole, become a firebrand fanatic, and you'll never be deported--let alone jailed for inciting violence.

Our politicians (the term "leaders" seems inappropriate) have been pushing "multiculturalism," and 'diversity." The leaders of the other side are pushing monoculture and homogeneity--Islam and sharia.

What's even crazier is that none of our western politicians even seems to grasp this.  They think that by uttering the magic words "multiculturalism" and "diversity," Muslims will see how enlightened they are and will stop killing westerners.

Stupid, venal, power-hungry politicians.  Crazy times.


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home