A Phobia is an Unnatural Fear: Try to Get That! Just Once, Please

By Rich Kozlovich

I keep seeing the words Islamophobia, xenophobia and racism being cavalierly thrown about by leftist excusers of Muslim actions, and the current crop of refugees to denigrate the sanity and morality of those opposed to the Islamization of the west and the immigration of more of these people. 

• First, I  think was should ask why it is that not one Muslim country is taking these people in? 
• Secondly, why is it instead of storming the borders of western nations with Judaic/Christian social paradigms, these immigrant Muslims aren't storming the borders of other Muslim dominated nations?  We'll deal with both is this piece.  
• Third, Islamophobia is an oxymoron. 

A phobia is is a mental disorder caused by an irrational fear of something. Does anyone really think fearing Islamists is irrational?  

They're called "radical" Muslims, but are they really Muslim radicals, or are they the true Muslim faithful actually following the commands as outlined in the Koran?  As for most Muslims who don't perpetrate violence, while they may personally be non-violent, they support Sharia and those who are violently attempting to perpetrate the Islamization of the world.  That's a center most teaching in the Koran.  

Fearing them in general isn't irrational, and when their population becomes dominant, they're always on the edge of violence against non-Muslims, along with those Muslims of different sects.  Why? Because each of these Muslim sects consider all the others sects heretics, and Sharia law calls for their deaths. 

Xenophobia is defined as " an intense or irrational dislike or fear of people from other countries".  Here's the reality.  These people are feared and disliked because they've earned that fear and distrust, it's because they're barbarians with a moral code that belongs in a sewer.  Rape, murder, crime follows these immigrants like fleas follow rats.   That's Islam!  Fearing and disliking them is not a mental issue - it's a reality issue.   As Raymond Ibrahim notes in his article, The Logic of Islamic Intolerance:

 From an Islamic paradigm - where Allah is the true god and Muhammad his final messenger -- “intolerance” for other religions is logical and difficult to condemn…… And no matter how violent, Islamic jihad -- terrorism -- will always be exonerated in Muslim eyes as fundamentally “altruistic.” On the other hand, Western secularists and multiculturalists, who believe in nothing and deem all cultures and religions equal, will continue to respect Islam and empower Muslims, convinced that terrorism is an un-Islamic aberration destined to go away -- that is, they will continue disbelieving their own eyes. Such is the offspring of that unholy union between Islamic logic and Western fallacy.......

Then we have racism.  Islam isn't a race - it's a political criminal movement masquerading as a religion.  Let's try and get this once and for all.  Fearing Islam isn't a mental disorder.  It's clear thinking based on 1400 years history and the reality we see going on around us in the world right now!  And we have to stop listening to these insane leftists who attempt to obfuscate realty with insane rhetoric filled with logical fallacies. They've lost their minds - it's time for the sane to step up and say so.  

Did you ever wonder why a screwball like Trump is so popular?  It's because he has the guts to say what most people in this country are thinking and doesn't care what the world thinks.  Especially the cloistered world of the leftist media, Hollywood, academia and leftist politicians. 

So, to answer my first two questions.  

These immigrants aren't wanted in these Muslim lands because they'll import their own culture and brand of Islam, followed by violence.   The Palestinian Liberation Organization was kicked out of Jordan for that reason, all of whom were Jordanian citizens.  These Muslim immigrants don't want to go to these Muslim dominated lands because it won't be safe, even if they're part of the same sect.  

Islamic lands are in reality medieval tribal societies with modern transportation, weaponry and communications, with no willingness to mingle with other tribes.  If these Muslim immigrants did in these lands what they're getting away with in Europe, they'd be executed, unless of course they raped, murdered and robbed non Muslims.  Then it would be ignored. After all, they're only kaafir.

That's Islam, and there's 1400 years of history to demonstrate fearing them isn't a phobia. 

 Update: 5/18/22 5:19 AM

Why It’s So Hard to Pity Muslims - By Raymond Ibrahim  May 18, 2022

How does one pity a group that itself regularly exhibits no pity or even mere tolerance for others?  This is the conundrum one faces when considering Muslim victim groups.

Take the Rohingya, for instance, a Muslim people that primarily lived in Burma (Myanmar), while, like most invading and conquering Muslims, not being indigenous to Burma.  There they have been severely persecuted by the indigenous Buddhists of that nation.  While the Rohingya are regularly presented as victims -- aspects of which is no doubt true -- historically and precipitating their current status, whenever they had the chance, they were the ones quick to victimize others.

In fact, and not unlike the Muslim minorities of other nations, the Rohingya have been committing the same sort of anti-infidel mayhem, violence, terrorism, and rape that one is accustomed to associating with “radical Islam” -- though news of it seldom reaches the West.  The main difference is that, unlike the West, Burma has responded with uncompromising ruthlessness..............

The Rohingya: Muslims whom nobody wants

By John Ray @ The Psychologist

Rohingya are mostly Bangladeshis who moved to Burma during the period when both countries were ruled by Britain.  The Burmese had no say in it but tolerated in their midst people whom they regarded as foreigners.  The Burmese are East Asian Buddhists, very different from the South Asian Rohingya.

During the British period all "Indians" did well and tended to ride roughshod over the native Burmese, often disrespecting Buddhist customs and holy places.  The Burmese reasserted themselves after gaining their independence, however, and many Rohingya did not accept that. They could not take the sort of treatment that they had previously dished out. So in the usual Muslim way the Rohingya turned to acts of terrorism against the Burmese state, now called Myanmar.  Muslims have long turned to acts of violence against "infidels" to get what they wanted.

It didn't work with the Burmese however. At the time Burma was a military dictatorship and still largely is.  The Burmese rulers hit back hard and are still doing so.  They now just want the little brown men permanently out of their peaceful Asian country.

Myanmar has however come under international pressure to halt their campaign because even the ancestral country of the Rohingya -- Bangladesh -- does not want them.  Bangladesh is a Muslim country with theoretical Muslim duties of hospitality but NO Muslim country ever offers permanent resettlement to other Muslims. Only foolish Western countries let in a people with a history of religiously motivated violence.  There are however many oil-rich Muslim countries who could conceivably be pressured into admitting them

Note that Myanmar also has a large non-Muslim population of immigrant Han Chinese, particularly in the North.  There is no aggression against them.  All men are not equal

The Prime minister of Myanmar is Aung San Suu Kyi, who gained international credit for her resistance to military rule.  Her moral authority was crucial to causing the transition to civilian rule.  The Rohingya issue has however led to pressure on her to renounce the oppressive policies against the Rohingya. She has not been responsive to that.

So what goes on in her mind about that? One can only speculate, but  my speculation is that she is comfortable with the Han Chinese immigrants in the North because they look like Burmese and have the same Buddhist religion.  The little brown men of the Rohingya with their horrible Arab religion evoke no sympathy from her, however.  Buddhism and Islam could hardly be more different.

Observations From the Back Row: Social Justice!

By Rich Kozlovich

Over the years we've seen the term "social justice" a lot.  But what does that mean exactly?  Well, like all slogans from the left - it means whatever the left wants it to mean.  And it usually takes on a patina of gray....eveything falls into a gray area for the left..... as long as it's promoting wrongs they want to be rights, and rights they want to be wrong.  The color gray is the color of fog - hard to see through.

However, in the real world devoid of these self delusional leftists social justice can take on a different patina.  Mexico's 'avengers' are armed citizens who are sick of the government failure to curtail crime and violence properly, or punish it properly, and the public is supporting them.  Are they organized?  No!  This is now a wave of activity being embraced by a larger and larger portion of Mexican society who are sick of crime and the lack of punishment.  They've decided if they're to have potection from crime and violence - they must provide it for themselves. 

This is a trend that's going to expand in more countries than Mexico.  But they weren't the first.  In the article: The Mad Monks of Myanmar they're presented in a negative light, but  I have been following this story and my first link was on Thursday, April 18, 2013 with the article, Monks Gone Bad, I pointed out: "There is a question not answered, nor is it asked in this article.

Why?

The author talks about poverty as a vehicle for inclusion into the religious orders, but that isn't an explanation as to why this particular group of monks she discusses have decided to be violent against Muslims. There is much more to this story that isn't being told, and it is my belief the right questions aren't being asked.   This article answers those unasked questions when a monk named Wirathu says;  “Muslims are fundamentally bad. Mohammed allows them to kill any creature. Islam is a religion of thieves, they do not want peace."  Does that sound irrational and hate filled?  Or is that merely an observation of reality?  Well, what's been going on in Europe since they've embraced their current Mulsim invasion called immigration.  Crime, violence and rape is endemic. 

I have stated in the past that at some point there is going to be a backlash against Muslim violence.  What I didn’t expect was to see it started by Buddhists.  What I also find interesting is how much the world bemoans violence against Muslims, and yet those same voices seem to be silent at violence perpetrated by Muslims.  The world has gone nuts.  This much is clear though.  When it starts it will become more unpleasant than anything we have seen for a long time.  I expect to see Eruope exploding in a civil war, and Europe's governments toppling like dominoes.

In Chicago the shooting of black thug by an off-duty policeman triggered the usual race baiting protests. The man was attacking a fireman - he was armed - he refused to acknowledge the cops instructions - and he was shot. So what's to protest? I'll bet the fireman who was being attacked has no problem with this cop, and now "Chicago superintendent Eddie Johnson, officials at Chicago Public Schools and protesters from the Black Lives Matter faction planned to meet to discuss the situation." What situation?  And since when did a crime become a situation?   The man was an armed attacker and got shot. and a video corroborates the officer's story. So what's to discuss?

Maybe these race baiting community organizers think this cop should have ignored the "situation"?   Or perhaps he should have called other police and waited patiently for them to intervene.....many minutes or even hours later?  Or perhaps he should have approached this thug nicely and pleaded with him to be kind and considerate to the fireman he was assaulting. 

Saying "pretty please" doesn't work with thugs, especially armed thugs.  It seems to me that's a good way of getting our police shot.  Don't you think?  So......what's to discuss?

Oh, wait, I know....I know.....these race baiting excusers for the thugs of the world will ask they be allowed to undertake the task of patrolling the streets themselves!  And to show the world how to properly do this unpleasant task they'll do it without guns, or weapons of any kind!  Now that's a great idea, don't you think?   I like that idea...... a lot!  I can't imagine a better way of being rid of them.     

While the Donald "shuffled his transition team three days after his surprising victory, diluting the role of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie while increasing the influence of Vice President-elect Mike Pence and Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, one of Washington’s most vocal critics of illegal immigration", - all conservatives - Democratic leaders have decided to make "Rep. Keith Ellison of Minnesota, the next head of the Democratic National Committee".  Ellison is a favorite for the position among liberal advocacy groups and lawmakers, including Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), the runner-up in this year's Democratic presidential primaries. Reid's backing is the latest sign that support for Ellison is broad. Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), Reid's likely successor, endorsed Ellison for the job on Friday."  

So they're choosing very progressive black Muslim...in short....a radical leftist who holds religious convictions antithetical to American law and values.  They're choosing a man whose religious convictions require him to hate Jews, gays, abuse women, freedom of choice and permits pedophilia.

Islam means "submission", and that's what they've imposed on every nation or people they've dominated.  Domination of society under Sharia is now and has always been the thrust of Muslims all through history - and that history is incontestable.  Ask any Christan or Jew living under Islamic law in Muslim controlled countries.  And since they're choosing a man whose core values support all the above I have to ask:  Is that their idea of "social justice"?

And the Democratic brain trust thinks that should work really well the next election?  

For those who've been watching Reid and Shumer - it's clear they're clueless, they're reckless, they've no real moral foundation and will jump on any bandwagon that will give them power.  They will scream moral outrage at a conservative for any action they take that offends the left and then turn right around and adopt the very "outrage" they railed against when it suits their agenda. 

They will never re-evaluate who and what they are because if they do that they will have to acknowledge they have no vision based on reality.  The visions of the left are convenient, propagandists paradisaic delusions, so they will keep on the path they've chosen.  They scream about Social Justice and then work to support and promote those who believe and live lives devoid of justice of any kind, and not one word from this cabal about the atrocities committed by Muslims against Christians and other religions in Muslim controlled countries. 

The fact of the matter is - who exactly do they have who's not a radical leftist?  There are no conservatives in the Democratic party or even moderates, the closest of which was former Senator Jim Webb, and he was crushed early in the 2016 primaries.  Their second best loved guy was even more radical than Hillary -  Bernie Sanders - and he wasn't even a Democrat until he ran.   It would appear the Democrats have no vision other than getting into power by pandering to the members of the Church of the Eternal Whine.  Make no mistake about this - the Democratic party in it's current makeup will not deviate from the path they chose decades ago. 

Buddhist militancy triggers international concern

James Crabtree in Colombo and Michael Peel in Bangkok December 28, 2014

Sri Lankan soldiers of the special task force patrol the streets of Aluthgama, a town in the south of the country, following clashes between Muslims and an extremist Buddhist group in June Shahabadeen Sahira had a traumatic first-hand view of a new wave of militant Buddhist nationalist groups, whose rise across parts of Asia has triggered growing international alarm. Wearing a black headscarf, the elderly Muslim former schoolteacher recalls her ordeal in June, when a gang burst into her home near the southern Sri Lankan coastal town of Aluthgama, during the worst religiously inspired violence to hit the tropical island nation in three decades.

“They came and took everything I had,” she recalls of the men from the country’s largely Buddhist Sinhalese majority, who burned dozens of homes in two days of clashes with Muslims. Three people were killed. “My house was ruined. All my money, all my jewellery, was gone,” she says. “If I could meet those responsible, I would ask: ‘Sir, does your Lord Buddha teach this?’” The bloodshed was sparked by a street-corner disagreement between a Buddhist monk and a young Muslim. But Alan Keenan, analyst at the International Crisis Group think-tank, says it is part of a wider trend: the rise of a new generation of militant anti-Muslim Buddhist organisations. The most prominent in Sri Lanka is the Bodu Bala Sena (BBS), or Buddhist Power Force.......To Read More....

My Take: As I've said in the past, I've been following this story with special interest. On July 10, 2013 I posted a link to this story:

The Mad Monks of Myanmar

Myanmar is home to a growing wave of anti-Muslim sentiment, as seen in the troubling 969 movement. The numerical significance of the digits is rooted in Buddhism’s Three Jewels (Tiratana), which comprise 24 attributes: nine special attributes of Lord Buddha, six core Buddhist teachings, and nine attributes of monkhood. Co-opted by members of Myanmar’s nationalistic Buddhist majority, the number has become a symbol of religious division that has led to both discrimination and violence. Even the government, under President Thein Sein, has taken controversial actions that seem to align with its anti-Muslim stance, from its ongoing purge of the nation's Muslim minority Rohingyas to its highly contentious two-child policy, applied solely to the same group.

While the movement has infiltrated the country’s mainstream over a long period of time, a prominent Buddhist monk, Ashin Wirathu, has recently become its unofficial leader. A photograph of Wirathu in crimson robes, with the words “The Face of Buddhist Terror”, made the cover of the July issue of TIME Magazine, causing a furor in Myanmar and drawing international attention to the country's heated religious tensions……To Read More…

My Take – I have been following this story and my first link was on Thursday, April 18, 2013 with the article, Monks Gone Bad, …To Read More…. “My Take” at the time was;

“There is a question not answered, nor is it asked in this article. Why? The author talks about poverty as a vehicle for inclusion into the religious orders, but that isn't an explanation as to why this particular group of monks she discusses have decided to be violent against Muslims. There is much more to this story that isn't being told, and it is my belief the right questions aren't being asked.

This article answers those unasked questions when a monk named Wirathu says:

 

 “Muslims are fundamentally bad. Mohammed allows them to kill any creature. Islam is a religion of thieves, they do not want peace.”

I have stated in the past that at some point there is going to be a backlash against Muslim violence. What I didn’t expect was to see it started by Buddhists. What I also find interesting is how much the world bemoans violence against Muslims, and yet those same voices seem to be silent at violence perpetrated by Muslims. The world has gone nuts. This much is clear though. When it starts it will become more unpleasant than anything we have seen for a long time.

Further Comments: I stand by that prediction. This isn't going to be isolated. The West, and especially Americans, finds the idea of a religious war anathema. We just won't accept that concept. Well, much of the rest of the world, particularly the Muslim world, views religion as the basis for war as a very real concept, and in the case of Muslims it's a religious requirement. 

 

Furthermore, they don't much care what the West thinks, and in point of fact, they like the West's reticence. That way they can use our own values against us and declare any effort to identify Islam as a warmongering criminal organization disguising itself as a religion as Islamophobia! 

 

All done with the help of ideologically corrupt elite leftists in government and the media. But reality will eventually overcome ideology. This is going to grow worldwide and become more unpleasant than anyone ever thought could happen in a modern world.