The Panty Jihad (UK Muslims angry)

frontpagemag ^ | June 15, 2004 | By Val MacQueen

[Steel and Fire and Stone]

I have noticed a tendency among some Christians to act like they believe that the Islamics are right and Western civilization is indeed the slimey crud-hole OBL and his ilk say it is. It is disturbing at the very least.

Interesting observation.

I've noticed the tendency among some in the secular left (and secular right as well, for that matter) to demagogue the folks who promote the values of traditional Western Civilization, i.e. Judeo-Christian values by attempting to associate them with today's favorite (Western) villain, OBL or other Muslim fanatics.

To associate those who have for 250 years built the first colleges, first orphanages, first poor houses (private forerunner to today's government corrupted welfare system), first hospitals, have given their all for "God and Country" and generally, have put the love in their words of into the action of common charity, with those who kill innocents, preach hate, destroy, murder, enslave, and commit all manner of other evil deeds in the name of a demonstrably, historically fake deity called "Allah", is more than outrageous.

It is evil, in and of itself. It's disturbing.

”Ends justifies the means” .. relative morality … relative truth … guilt by association, it’s all just another word for “EVIL”.

SFS

[HenryLeeII]

Yes, you are correct in your estimation of porn as usual, but I would add that this is soft porn, merely the opening salvo in the mosque wars. Once a court establishes the legality of its existence near a mosque, we need to devise images that would be hard-core and offensive to the Islamicists' eyes, but still passable and non-offensive to the civilized and original inhabitants of Merry ol' England. Given their history of full-frontal nudity on the telly, I'm sure our allies will devise a follow-up campaign to further the war on terror. And before you can say "fish slapping dance," we'll have live-action "demonstrations" being enacted on the sidewalks in front of the offensive mosques!

[steve-b]

I have noticed a tendency among some "Christians" to act like they believe that the Islamics are right and Western civilization is indeed the slimey crud-hole OBL and his ilk say it is. It is disturbing at the very least.

(Disclaimer quotes added around "Christians", because I don't think they represent Christianity in general any more than Wahabiwackjobs represent Islam in general.)

*** DING DING DING *** No more calls; we have a winner!

This sort of fifth-columnism is not helpful.

[steve-b]

The true Christians who did all those positive things are, obviously, not the "some 'Christians'" to whom the author was referring.

The latter are more accurately represented by other bits of history, such as the Salem witch trials.

[tjwmason]

Sufficiently to rescue your sorry butts.

Here's little me thinking that we were talking about the place of religion in public life, not whether America turns up late in confronting expansionist dictators. Fortunately, you (or rather your leaders) do seem to have realised that tyrannies only grow stronger when left to fester, and so together our countries are confronting the new rise of expansionist Islam. Unfortunately, your personal contribution is to call for the abolition of the Christian nature of my country - an entirely counter-productive development if ever I saw one.

[SoIA-79]

I believe Western Civilization is by far the best civ on the planet, nothing else even comes close. Our Judeo-Christian values are a large part of the reason for that. There are obvious blemish's on our record but I believe that they can be fixed. Things look junky right now because we are still trying to assimilate massive technological advances into our culture.

I have no problem with Judeo-Christian values or Christians in general, the problem I have is with people who would enforce 'the republic of virtue' on others. Enforced morality has never worked, voluntary morality in the long run works. I just can't see the radical Islamics as a force for good that western Christians should align themselves with. I think in the long run it harms the religion more than it helps. Anyway just my $.02

[SoIA-79]

I don't believe that it represents all Christians either. Not even a fraction. But last time I looked it wasn't the Swedish bikini team flying planes into building. We need to focus on the people who are out to get us

[steve-b]

Er, work on your reading comprehension. What I, and other civilized people, advocate is the abolition of one of those pre-civilized legal relics shared with the body politics dominated by Wahabiwackjobs.

[steve-b]

I've noticed the tendency among some in the secular left (and secular right as well, for that matter) to demagogue the folks who promote the values of traditional Western Civilization, i.e. Judeo-Christian values by attempting to associate them with today's favorite (Western) villain, OBL or other Muslim fanatics

Er, wrong target. It was Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell, not a secular leftist or rightist, who expressed agreement with the Wahabiwackjobs in the wake of the 9-11 Massacre. Take it up with them.

[tjwmason]

What I, and other civilized people, advocate is the abolition of one of those pre-civilized legal relics shared with the body politics dominated by Wahabiwackjobs.

Given that the your own great state of Virginia retained an established church until recently, I would be a tad careful about referring to laws as 'pre-civilised relics'. Also, you seem to be terribly keen on notion that history is moving forwards, and that we are far better than our fore-bears; but then that is not the only leftwing perspective which you seem to advocate.

I would suggest that you realise that there are blasphemy laws, and blasphemy laws. It may shock you, but the English blasphemy laws do not permit us to execute those who leave the Church of England (given that over half of the country has been baptised into the C.ofE., that would result in a large number of executions); it does not prohibit reading the Qur'an; indeed, I would maintain that there is at least as much religious freedom in England with her blasphemy laws and established Church as there is in the United States groaning under its judicial tyranny. At least in England it would be possible for a sincere Roman Catholic to be appointed to the highest courts, not so whilst the Judicial Committee of the Senate takes its present stance.

To suggest that English law concerning blasphemy is in any manner comparable with, for example, Saudi Arabian law is so fatuous that it is beyond belief. It is like me stating that the United States is a republic, and that the Third Reich was a republic, therefore the United States is like the Third Reich. I would merely be laughed at, and would deserve such a response. I would laugh at you, with your insane perspective on English law, but you do seem to take it seriously, and so do others similarly misguided.

My point is that the West is being threatened by expansionist Islam in a manner we have not seen since the victory at Temeswar in 1716, perhaps even since they got as far as Poitiers. To abandon our own heritage is half way to surrender. To saecularise will merely make their job easier. We need to build upon the heritage which made the West great and strong, and the foundation-stone which did so was Christianity and Mother Church.

I note that in other conversations in this thread you are engaged with those who would point out the many areas in which western civilisation has entered a period of decline and decadence. Surely you do not believe that the rampant presentation of pornography, including to children; the proposals to legitimise gay 'marriage'; the growing culture of death where murdering un-born babies, and the old is fine; and rearing much of a generation without reference to their fathers is fine and dandy. If the West is to survive, and to win, we must build on solid foundations; we must not confuse liberty and licentiousness as you seem most keen to do.

[tessalu]

Mabye they should post acts of terrorism around the
mosques and body parts blown all to pieces. They would like this. Islam is not known for showing it's bare
bottom, but it is known for terrorism and murder.

[walford]

I'm offended also -- too skinny. I have enough Latin blood in me to appreciate una culita redonda, so long as there is a neck, a waist and no guacamole.

Oops... I mean who knows what damage could be done to society if confronted by such a sight as is posted at the top of this thread. Jennifer Lopez' and Martina Hingis' backsides are menaces to the good morals of mankind and should only be allowed in public in a burqa. Who knows what 12-year-old boys are going to do if they see a billboard like that?

You now may go back to your blood-soaked action movie.

[NCPAC]

Excellent point, Tessalu! Unfortunately, I fear there are those on this very thread who would rather see "body parts all blown to pieces" than they would a nicely shaped woman in a mildly sexy pose.

[walford]

Let me second that point as well. Here we have practitioners of the 'religion of peace' beating women for showing an ankle but having no problems showing a beheading or disembowling on TV for all ages to see.

I saw a picture of a Palestinian woman -- in traditional dress -- taking her children to enjoy the notorius diarama of the post-suicide bombing in a Sbarro pizzaria, complete with fabricated body parts.

Maybe what they need is to see MORE women's backsides and less blood and guts.

Also, it's hard to subjugate women if you're on your knees grovelling. Try it sometime, Achmed, it's fun and they deserve it...

[baltodog]

Very few things on this planet are as pleasing to the eye as a nice ass.

[nmh]

"Very few things on this planet are as pleasing to the eye as a nice ass."

How shallow and crude.

[baltodog]

WOW!!!

Did this thread ever go nuts!!!

What if this ad was for toilet paper? Would we still be having this debate?

Or Beano? Or Kaopectate? Or Metamusal?

[steve-b]

you seem to be terribly keen on notion that history is moving forwards, and that we are far better than our fore-bears

Damn straight.

[Mister Blond]

Soft porn is showing the act of sex without showing penetration.

This is not soft porn.