9/10/10

President Obama; Cheerleader of Mohammadanism

President Obama recently has made speeches for religious tolerance in order that the nation will stop opposing the construction of mosques near buildings Muslims have taken the time to destroy. The President exhibits completely incomprehension of what religious tolerance is, and why Americans increasingly oppose Muslim immigration to the United States.

Americans are opposed to domestic violence, terrorism and seditious legal constructions such as Sharia Muslim law from increasing in this nation. On the other hand they are obviously tolerant of religions that have no element of organized violence and legal sedition as part of their belief system. One may argue that there are good Muslims and bad Muslims like there may be mostly blank bullets for a stage prop gun with just a percent of real bullets—yet it makes a difference to the actors if some of those bullets are live rounds.

One can argue that just some automobiles experience computer chip break failure or that just some bottles of headache pills have poison in them yet citizens care and suspend or recall the product until it is fixed.

The President may be a completely disingenuous idiot to not comprehend that the Muslim ‘religion’ has a large element of violence in it unique amidst major world religions. The United States may survive the President's unamerican ideas on religious tolerance. Being socialized outside the United States as a youth living in Muslim nations President Obama developed a warped, misguided idea of the nature of 'Islam' living as he was within the Dar al Islam.

Americans have no need to tolerate threats of mass destruction and sundry terrorist incidents along with ingression of a seditious legal system under the umbrella of ‘religious tolerance’. The President may fail to comprehend that the nation is tolerant of a myriad of esoteric and even fruit-cakish religions with equanimity and would have little to say about the Muslim religion if it shared the common characteristic of being non-violent and not legally seditious as with all these others. He should not be a kind of snake oil salesman of an evil empire of violence or a duplicitous follower of the false prophet levering support for the increase of terrorism in the United States under the label of ‘religious tolerance’.

Consider Americans religions like Soka Gakkai, Pure Land Buddhism, Eckankar, Christian Science, Modern Mormonism and even Wicca—Americans are tolerant of these sometimes extra terrestrial believing faiths because they give no concern about a percent of their practitioners as being terrorist mass murderers even with systematic jihadist theology. The President stupidly as a log believes Americans are opposed to religious ideas rather than to secular terrorist actions that a significant number of Muslims have are perennially evangelized by to become followers of the jihadist path.

Would Mayor Bloomberg or the People New York be tolerant of a Fascist Religion and the Construction of Nazi Temples of elegant scale? Would they be tolerant of a Sacred Church of the Klan constructed in Selma Alabama? Would Atlanta welcome a Shrine to Valhalla and the pagan Pantheon of Neo-Gods including Adolph Hitler, Heinrich Himmler and Vice Air Marshall Kesselring?

Not everything that calls itself a religion is tolerated in the United States. It is the association of a religion with violence even at the periphery when it is common and recurrent that provides justification to sorting out and restricting the actions of organizations with simultaneously religious functions and doctrines occasionally interpreted as justifications for unholy wars through terror, subversion and other enemy directed activities against the people of the United States.

Today post Hiroshima and post 9-11 the Presidents call for religious tolerance of Mohammadanism in America sounds loudly untrue. If globally Mohammadanists forsake the way of violence for a few decades of their existence and have a change of heart worthy of creating a credible social belief that violence, terror and Sharia sedition are not really latent traits that often emerge in generations like transformative wolf man genes mutating human life consuming social progeny every so often then Mohamadanism could be tolerated in the United States could be tolerated just another religion.

The Romans and Greeks tended toward religious tolerance bringing new false gods into their pantheons from abroad. As they became decadent they also brought in and trained more soldiers for their armies from foreign locales. Attila spent some of his youth in the company of the son of a Roman elite politician-soldier. Roman tolerance of sundry creeds and peoples was ultimately the cause of their downfall, for they put to death God incarnate-Jesus Christ, whom they could not recognize amidst all their statuary. The living spirit of God dwells not in temples, mosques or jihadist and poppy growing terror cells in Pakistan these days, but in the hearts and minds of the faithful.

The violence in Mohammadanism is the reason for the desirability of excluding Muslims from immigrating to the United States. Mohamadanism is a security threat even if only one percent of Muslims are terrorists, supporters of terrorism or thinking about sedition support for Sharia. The United States simply doesn’t need them or the problems they create. It is true that Muslim abstemiousness from alcohol and sexual perversity are excellent things when actualized, yet like pagan idols they won’t b sufficient for salvation. Like violent pagan religions such as those of The Church of Thor and the First Church of Mars, Blood Death and Thrill Killing, Mohammadanism should not be tolerated unless it enters a universal condition of remission and usual non-violence almost all the time.

President Obama has combined the worst Clinton era economic bad infrastructure to the Bush II deficit spending policy to produce a hybrid economic malaise. His own new contribution seems to be advocacy for increase of the uniquely violent major world religion as a community organizer in the United States.

No comments:

Imperfect Character is Universal

The question of why anything exists rather than nothing was a question that Plotinus considered in The Enneads. Why would The One order anyt...