Friday, November 6, 2009

NON-Glue Sniffers of the World, Unite!

You gotta love it!

Larisa Alexandrovna had to resurrect her obligatory, "I am not excusing what the shooter did by any measure," from another post while going off on conservatives who are inconveniently pointing out that Nidal Malik Hasan shouted "Allahu Akbar" - God is great - before opening fire, handed out Korans the morning of the attack, was openly sympathetic to Islamist homicide bombers, claimed speciously to be born to "Palestinian parents," and who killed in cold blood, not like "a guy who snapped." And she does this while falsely alleging racism once again:

The reaction to condemn all Muslims for this shooting is a reaction based in bigotry, not fact. That is what I am calling racist, not people outraged over the shooting - which would include me.
The slight problem is that I've never condemned all Muslims. The Political Carnival, also with a comprehension problem, hopped on "Airhead" Alexandrovna's bandwagon: Hence, the title of this post about the "non-glue sniffers," which is apparently a self-proclaimed badge of honor among leftist terror-enablers.

In any case,
Neptunus Lex sums it up for the mentally-challenged who smear conservatives as stupid racists and who can't differentiate between upstanding Muslim citizens and terror-backing Islamist scum:

To the extent that radical Islamic terrorists constitute a murderous threat to innocent Americans, Hasan had it exactly right. To the extent that the vast majority of Muslims want only to live their lives in peace, pay their taxes, send their kids to college and mow their lawns he had it exactly wrong. It’s a little more than ironic that Hasan became that which he believed others took him for – a weak dick coward more willing to gun down unarmed American soldiers than care for them in a combat zone.

Perhaps if Hasan had been willing to sacrifice his principles just a smidge and marry a nice Muslim girl who would be happy enough to raise his children for him but didn’t want to sit in the back room under a burkha like chattel, he’d have found more reasons for living than killing. Perhaps.

Of course, finding that perfect woman would have eventually resulted in having to, you know: Get dirty with the fiddly bits. With a woman.

Far better to stew in your resentments ...

And, further down at the post:

It’s not that most or even many Muslims want to cut infidel throats, for if they did it wouldn’t be a question of if or whether and we’d be at it hammer and tongs with the outcome not in doubt. The problem is that there is found within the Koran – the perfect, unalterable wisdom of a single, charismatic man as given to him by “God” – sufficient reason to do so, if you go looking hard enough. Which, for weak dick nutters, is all too easy to do.

We’ve loonies of our own in Christendom any have had the opportunity many times over the last two millenia to prove the fallen nature of man. But their crimes and misdemeanors are granted no borderline personality waivers by the Prince of Peace. “Love thy neighbor as thyself” was not footnoted, nor was it asterisked.

At the end of the day it comes down to this: Our guy died for us.

Theirs killed for them.


Dave said...

That is what I am calling racist, not people outraged over the shooting - which would include me.

Since when was Islam a "race?"

As for these so-called "peaceful" practitioners of Islam I keep hearing about, I'll buy into that BS when I see them get their sorry asses off the couch and fan out into the streets to protest what their more "radical" brethren are doing.

Until I see that, I consider them all to be sympathetic to what the terrorists are doing, and as I see it, the line between an Islamic terrorist and their sympathizer is so thin as to be essentially transparent.

Christianity and Buddhism went through their violent periods, yet both matured.

Islam predates Christianity, yet the Islamists seem unable to put away the sword.

Why is this? Is it because Islam is not so much a "religion" as it is a violent political movement?

I say that is exactly what it is.

Sue me.


chaoticsynapticactivity said...


Islam is, has been, and until they have their "reformation," is an entire culture, religion and government all rolled into one. Had a pastor we support from India in town a few months back do a closed session, and he specifically addressed this issue. I already knew it from hearing a man who grew up Muslim and became a baptist in his late teen years who spoke a few months after 9/11, but their point is Islam is it all. We, however, in our Western way of "compartmentalizing" think it's a religion, and fail to merge, functionally the governmental aspects into the understanding.

That's what makes it hard for us to address/counter the attacks, because we look at it as but one piece of the overall puzzle.

Dave said...


We, however, in our Western way of "compartmentalizing" think it's a religion, and fail to merge, functionally the governmental aspects into the understanding.

You are essentially describing exactly what Nazism was.

Many younger Americans see Nazism as nothing more than racism, the Holocaust and militarism, but it was far more than that.

It was an all-encompassing social and political structure that reached deeply into the lives of all Germans, regardless of their social status.

It was, in fact, intended to replace Christianity in Germany, but the Catholic Church resisted, and the Hitlerites had to back off to a certain extent.


Grizzly Mama said...

Islam predates Christianity

I agree with what you say, Dave - however islam doesn't predate Christianity. FYI.

JBW said...

That's what happens when you mix religion with government, ladies.