Showing posts with label culturism culturist islam multiculturalism Constitution. Show all posts
Showing posts with label culturism culturist islam multiculturalism Constitution. Show all posts
Saturday, October 2, 2010
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
Why is Culturist John Such a Jerk??
Pamela Geller asked that people bring flags rather than political signs to her 9 - 11 protest against the Ground Zero mosque. In fact, she originally said she'd confiscate anything other than flags. Furthermore, she said terrible things about the August 22nd Anti-Mosque rally at Ground Zero. And, I want to bring a sign that says, "Stopping Sharia in America is Culturist not Racist."
I respect Pamela. She is a relentless anti-Jihadist and I have seen her at a million rallies. But at none of those events were we in the audience told what to say. I have a gut reaction against all who would stifle the voice of the public. But respecting Pamela, I assume there must be some good served by not letting the people vent their spleen as they see fit.
If I get it, Pamela argues that it is more sensitive to 9 - 11 families to bring flags. I think crowds battling the enemy head-on with signs that say "No Sharia Here" will do more to lift 9 - 11 families' feelings than indulging in vague patriotic platitudes. To me, identifying the enemy and saying "never again" respects the victims. I know at least some 9 - 11 families feel the same way.
So when Pamela's people ask me to put away my sign, should I? Is there something I am missing? Am I being a jerk? I think this rally should represent the same defiance of Sharia than all the others. Perhaps that defiance will come from the speakers. Perhaps there is strategic point I am missing. I plan on bringing my sign. Should I? Would my bringing a sign prove that I am a big jerk?
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Friday, June 11, 2010
STOP THE GROUND ZERO MOSQUE WITH FARA AND CULTURISM
We can stop the mosque at Ground Zero if we exchange the multicultural point of view for a culturist point of view and prosecute the mosque’s primary backer, Imam Rauf, under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).
Passed in 1938, FARA initially focused on “subversive” political propaganda. The purpose of FARA is to insure that the U.S. Government and the people of the United States are informed of the source of information (propaganda) and the identity of persons attempting to influence U.S. public opinion, policy, and laws. Upon registering as a foreign agent, the public has access to the foreign agent’s records concerning the publicity campaigns, lobbying expenditures, funding flows, offices activities and disbursements in support of those activities. In addition, the Act also requires that informational materials (formerly called propaganda) be labeled with a conspicuous statement that the information is disseminated by the agents on behalf of the foreign principal.
The act was passed in response to German propaganda in the lead-up to World War II. Unfortunately, persons whose activities are of a "purely commercial nature or solely of a religious, scholastic, academic, scientific or fine arts nature are exempt. CAIR Unmasked, an organization dedicated to getting the Council of American – Islamic Relations, registered as a foreign agent, does not think religious status excuses Islamic organizations from compliance with FARA.
The problematic distinction between religious and political activities in our law stems from our confusing our culture with supposed global culture. We assume a separation of church and state. But this is a very western notion based on Jesus Christ’s order to “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s” (Matthew 22:21). Muhammed, the founder of Islam, was both a political, religious leader, and a warlord. Islam has no separation of church and state or mosque and state. In order for us to properly enforce FARA we must recognize that Islam is both a religious and a political system.
Two pieces of evidence underlay this contention. The first is the existence of Sharia courts. Sharia courts are Islamic religious courts. In Islamic jurisprudence, they decide civil as well as religious disputes. So when advancing Islam, foreign agents are also advancing a legal system. This proves that Islam is inherently political. Secondly, we must know that Islam is an expansive political system. Much like NAZI and Communist systems, we must recognize it as a competing aggressor. As evidence, we should remember that Islam nearly conquered Spain and Eastern Europe. They were only stopped from taking all of Europe by defensive military action. The very existence of the large “Muslim world” is evidence of successful military expansion.
The proposed mosque at Ground Zero of the 9 – 11 attacks is to be named “Cordoba House.” Cordoba was the capital of Spain under Muslim domination. This is an overt reference to a desire to re-establish hegemony over western lands. The fact that it is at the site of an Islamic attack on our greatest symbols of economic and military might, confirms this assertion. Multiculturalism tells us that we have no core culture. Furthermore its directive to “celebrate diversity” assumes that no cultures are aggressive or un-American or anti-western. We must take a culturist point of view that recognizes cultural diversity and competition. We, the West, have a non-Islamic culture to protect and a right to protect it from aggressors. We need to replace the multicultural point of view with a culturist point of view.
Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is the head of the effort to build a mosque at Ground Zero. He refuses to say where the $100 million for the mosque’s construction is coming from. We can only speculate that it must derive from Malaysia or Saudi Arabia. Were a brave politician to demand it, we could force him to register Imam Rauf as a foreign agent under FARA. This would mean that his books would be open and he would have to label his mosque as propaganda! Strengthened, FARA could then be used to forbid the mosque and the Saudi’s relentless building of mosques across America. The New York Post reports that the Kuwaiti born Rauf who is based in Malaysia has ties to the flotilla of jihadis that caused conflict with Israel. He provides a fantastic opportunity for a culturist application of FARA.
We need to reverse our multicultural blindness to cultures in general, we need to take a culturist approach to Islam and recognize it as a hostile political system. From this vantage point we need to get disclosure from the Islamic propagandist Imam Rauf under FARA in order to stop the travesty of a mosque being built at Ground Zero.
Passed in 1938, FARA initially focused on “subversive” political propaganda. The purpose of FARA is to insure that the U.S. Government and the people of the United States are informed of the source of information (propaganda) and the identity of persons attempting to influence U.S. public opinion, policy, and laws. Upon registering as a foreign agent, the public has access to the foreign agent’s records concerning the publicity campaigns, lobbying expenditures, funding flows, offices activities and disbursements in support of those activities. In addition, the Act also requires that informational materials (formerly called propaganda) be labeled with a conspicuous statement that the information is disseminated by the agents on behalf of the foreign principal.
The act was passed in response to German propaganda in the lead-up to World War II. Unfortunately, persons whose activities are of a "purely commercial nature or solely of a religious, scholastic, academic, scientific or fine arts nature are exempt. CAIR Unmasked, an organization dedicated to getting the Council of American – Islamic Relations, registered as a foreign agent, does not think religious status excuses Islamic organizations from compliance with FARA.
The problematic distinction between religious and political activities in our law stems from our confusing our culture with supposed global culture. We assume a separation of church and state. But this is a very western notion based on Jesus Christ’s order to “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s” (Matthew 22:21). Muhammed, the founder of Islam, was both a political, religious leader, and a warlord. Islam has no separation of church and state or mosque and state. In order for us to properly enforce FARA we must recognize that Islam is both a religious and a political system.
Two pieces of evidence underlay this contention. The first is the existence of Sharia courts. Sharia courts are Islamic religious courts. In Islamic jurisprudence, they decide civil as well as religious disputes. So when advancing Islam, foreign agents are also advancing a legal system. This proves that Islam is inherently political. Secondly, we must know that Islam is an expansive political system. Much like NAZI and Communist systems, we must recognize it as a competing aggressor. As evidence, we should remember that Islam nearly conquered Spain and Eastern Europe. They were only stopped from taking all of Europe by defensive military action. The very existence of the large “Muslim world” is evidence of successful military expansion.
The proposed mosque at Ground Zero of the 9 – 11 attacks is to be named “Cordoba House.” Cordoba was the capital of Spain under Muslim domination. This is an overt reference to a desire to re-establish hegemony over western lands. The fact that it is at the site of an Islamic attack on our greatest symbols of economic and military might, confirms this assertion. Multiculturalism tells us that we have no core culture. Furthermore its directive to “celebrate diversity” assumes that no cultures are aggressive or un-American or anti-western. We must take a culturist point of view that recognizes cultural diversity and competition. We, the West, have a non-Islamic culture to protect and a right to protect it from aggressors. We need to replace the multicultural point of view with a culturist point of view.
Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is the head of the effort to build a mosque at Ground Zero. He refuses to say where the $100 million for the mosque’s construction is coming from. We can only speculate that it must derive from Malaysia or Saudi Arabia. Were a brave politician to demand it, we could force him to register Imam Rauf as a foreign agent under FARA. This would mean that his books would be open and he would have to label his mosque as propaganda! Strengthened, FARA could then be used to forbid the mosque and the Saudi’s relentless building of mosques across America. The New York Post reports that the Kuwaiti born Rauf who is based in Malaysia has ties to the flotilla of jihadis that caused conflict with Israel. He provides a fantastic opportunity for a culturist application of FARA.
We need to reverse our multicultural blindness to cultures in general, we need to take a culturist approach to Islam and recognize it as a hostile political system. From this vantage point we need to get disclosure from the Islamic propagandist Imam Rauf under FARA in order to stop the travesty of a mosque being built at Ground Zero.
Sunday, June 6, 2010
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Our Culturist Battle at the 9-11 Cordoba House Mosque Debate
On May 25th, 2010 we battled with the Lower Manhattan, Community Board 1 meeting over the building of a Mega - Mosque at Ground Zero ! What our speakers and the commission failed to recognize is that Islam is not just another benign multicultural reason to celebrate diversity. This mosque is a flag of conquest. It is an insult added to injury. It will stir pride in Jihadis all over the world.
www.culturism.us
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Muslims and Culturist Nuance
The culturist policy towards Islam dictates that we stop Muslim immigration and do not recognize Muslim holidays. Culturist thinking also argues that we should not needlessly antagonize Muslim Americans or violate their Constitutional rights. These culturist policy suggestions provide the best methods by which to foster the unity culturism seeks and safeguard America.
In some European cities Muslims have become such a large block of the population they can make demands, disrupt affairs and get a taste of victory when propagandized towards this end. That sends the testosterone level up in males. They feel they could supplant the current top dogs and become a ruling class. We should not allow such large pockets of foreign, un-assimilated populations of any stripe to develop.
No nation is required to admit any persons to whom it objects. Not allowing more Muslims to enter the US would not violate our Constitution. US Constitutional rights only apply to Americans. We have no global or mystical 'human rights' obligation to continue on an immigration pattern. We need to be especially harsh on this account because Islam is, at its core, hostile to Western values. A growing Islamic community is more likely to produce threats to our safety and society. We need not take that risk.
That said, Culturism is dedicated to uniting America and, ultimately, the Western world. And it is also pragmatic. Over a million Muslims live among us legally. We cannot make them leave without savaging our Constitution. Mass deportation would undermine, not protect, the Constitution and our Western heritage. We should profile those who have gone to radical mosques. But unity can best be fostered, in all who are not haters of America, by making love for America our goal. Fairness and kindness are our best weapons in this endeavor.
For unity's sake, we must not needlessly antagonize otherwise possibly good citizens. But being friendly does not mean giving legal sanction to other culture's holidays in our schools or society. Drawing this legal line will define our core culture by pointing to our traditions. When we legally affirm that we are just as Islamic or Buddhist or Malay a nation as we are Christian, Jewish or Enlightenment-based, it undermines the Western identity upon which we must guide ourselves. Honor killings, child brides and polygamy won't be far behind.
An Islamic presence will always present a danger. After a few generations of moderation a radical son may be born. The whole ideology of Islam makes this a real and fearful possibility. To reduce this risk we must not increase the Islamic population. We must stop the funding of Mosques by foreign governments. If people preaching radical Islam, our government must watch them. Loyal Muslims will understand. We must also be aware, however, that violating the rights or liberties of legal Muslims will only create antagonism and push people towards Jihad. And that would undermine our culturist goal of unity.
In some European cities Muslims have become such a large block of the population they can make demands, disrupt affairs and get a taste of victory when propagandized towards this end. That sends the testosterone level up in males. They feel they could supplant the current top dogs and become a ruling class. We should not allow such large pockets of foreign, un-assimilated populations of any stripe to develop.
No nation is required to admit any persons to whom it objects. Not allowing more Muslims to enter the US would not violate our Constitution. US Constitutional rights only apply to Americans. We have no global or mystical 'human rights' obligation to continue on an immigration pattern. We need to be especially harsh on this account because Islam is, at its core, hostile to Western values. A growing Islamic community is more likely to produce threats to our safety and society. We need not take that risk.
That said, Culturism is dedicated to uniting America and, ultimately, the Western world. And it is also pragmatic. Over a million Muslims live among us legally. We cannot make them leave without savaging our Constitution. Mass deportation would undermine, not protect, the Constitution and our Western heritage. We should profile those who have gone to radical mosques. But unity can best be fostered, in all who are not haters of America, by making love for America our goal. Fairness and kindness are our best weapons in this endeavor.
For unity's sake, we must not needlessly antagonize otherwise possibly good citizens. But being friendly does not mean giving legal sanction to other culture's holidays in our schools or society. Drawing this legal line will define our core culture by pointing to our traditions. When we legally affirm that we are just as Islamic or Buddhist or Malay a nation as we are Christian, Jewish or Enlightenment-based, it undermines the Western identity upon which we must guide ourselves. Honor killings, child brides and polygamy won't be far behind.
An Islamic presence will always present a danger. After a few generations of moderation a radical son may be born. The whole ideology of Islam makes this a real and fearful possibility. To reduce this risk we must not increase the Islamic population. We must stop the funding of Mosques by foreign governments. If people preaching radical Islam, our government must watch them. Loyal Muslims will understand. We must also be aware, however, that violating the rights or liberties of legal Muslims will only create antagonism and push people towards Jihad. And that would undermine our culturist goal of unity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)