WE HAVE NO way of determining which Muslims subscribe to pure Islam. The reason this matters is that pure Islam is seditious. Islamic doctrine is more political than religious, and its sole political goal is the domination of Islam over all over religions and all governments.It is a Muslim's religious duty to achieve that political goal.
When Muslims move to a country, a certain percentage of them start agitating for special considerations. They start to organize and influence the nation politically in a way that is good for Islam and bad for freedom and equality. When the percentage of the Muslims in a nation's population becomes high enough, they gain so much political power that freedoms and rights begin to disappear. (Watch this video to learn more.)
Given all this, until we have a way of determining who is dedicated to pure Islam, no more Muslims should be allowed to immigrate into free countries.
Does this seem extreme? It's not as bad as it might seem. We already choose who can immigrate and who cannot. We make the rules. This is our country, after all. We are not under any obligation to allow anyone to immigrate who wants to. They do it with our blessing or they don't do it.
So this policy is simply adding to the already-existing filter.
This is not racist. Islam is not a race; it's an ideology. The policy of stopping Muslim immigration is simply acknowledging the reality of the Islamic teachings. I know there are Muslims who reject the violent and intolerant verses of the Qur'an. But Islam also teaches taqiyya and we have no way of knowing who is sincere and who is deliberately deceiving us.
We should not take the chance, at least until we find some way to discern between people who genuinely reject the political goals of Islam and those who do not. In the meantime, we should stop all immigration into free countries by Muslims while we can. You can get the process started right now by signing this petition.
Does signing a petition do any good? According to ThePetitionSite (the organization I used to create this petition), the answer is: "Yes — often, but the answer really depends on a number of factors. In general, the more a target organization is impacted by public opinion, the more effective are the petitions. In addition, ThePetitionSite enhances the credibility of online petitions by centralizing signature collection, structuring/regulating signature data collection and output, facilitating communication of petitions via fax, email, etc. and by using fraud-reduction technology. Remember — the effect of a petition usually goes far beyond the actual list of signatures. Journalists write stories about the petitions, signers get inspired to take additional actions, and other "potential targets" conform their behavior to avoid being a target."
Petitions can also exert an influence through two powerful principles of influence: Social proof and commitment and consistency. Petitions have been known to ignite important public debates.
When this petition reaches 50,000 signatures, I will make sure each member of the House and the Senate finds out about it. And I will make sure newspapers and magazines all over the country find out about it. Your signature will make a difference. Sign the petition today: No More Muslim Immigration.
15 comments:
Thanks for doing this Citizen Warrior. I'm proud to say that I signed the petition, and I would encourage everyone to sign.
Stop Muslim immigration now!
"Given all this, until we have a way of determining who is dedicated to pure Islam, no more Muslims should be allowed to immigrate into free countries."
I am with you 1000% on this one as usual. These people need to be segregated from the west to take inventory of what cancer lies amongst us already. As you point out there's no scarlet letter separating the so called non existent "moderate arabs" from the truly radical ones which is all part of the whole shebang.Just as they like it to be, so therefore the whole apple cart is spoiled, and that's too bad for them their people can't play nice with others, I say we shoulda done it right after 911 when opinion might have allowed it.
I know it'll never happen now, unless we are attacked again by Muslims, and even then the liberals would still bend over for their crap/their favorite position.
I even go a step further and say no back and forth travel from America to Muslim countries for the ones allowed to stay. You'd find out real quick America isn't that important to them, only to take over from the inside out as is the master plan.
I want to see a movement to X-rate the Koran, Hadiths and Sira..slap a Parental Advisory..
Awesome, CW.
Thanks for doing this.
One step at a time...
The momentum on our side is increasing around the world. That post Pastorius put up yesterday makes a good point:
"...the multitudes of screaming genocidal Muslim protesters who have graced the streets of the civilized world from Canada Europe and beyond since the start of Israel’s retaliation to Gazanian missiles..." do a better job of convincing people of what we've been telling them for years than "I could ever do if I wrote day and night seven days a week attempting to expose the true nature of Islam."
The Muslims are providing their own worst PR. Every time they blow something up or riot or even protest in their ugly way, we have probably gained a few more converts to our side, especially if they have already gotten some solid information from one of us before.
We will gain converts regardless of whether there is another large attack on U.S. soil. They already know they need to be careful about waking the sleeping giant, so they are trying to keep the hotheads from ruining their long-range plans. Too late. The giant is awakening, thanks to what each of us are doing. We must keep speaking up. Our efforts are making a difference. We can win this thing!
Unconstitutional.
(1)Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof
SCOTUS has decided that Gitmo pricks are 'persons' under the constitution, it not reality to think that persons would be barred because they are muslims
(14) nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
We need an amendment which fixes the protections of the document to citizens or those documented to be becoming citizens
Without that, much of the constitution is related to 'persons'
"We must keep speaking up. Our efforts are making a difference. We can win this thing!"
Damn straight and we will win in spite of half the country's soft spot for the "poor wittle misunderstood muswims"
Chicago Ray, I laughed out loud when I read your last comment!
Epa, restricting Muslim immigration does not restrict the free speech of our citizens, Muslim or not, so it doesn't violate the constitution on that point. And it doesn't deprive any citizen of her life, liberty, or property.
Glad I made you laugh :>) Too bad it's not funny though how the libs have graduated from "useful idiots" during the Vietnam and cold wars to "necessary nimrods" for the enemy since 911.
I guess the younger ones can't be blamed entirely though, since the schools today don't teach them anything useful, opting for "Homosexual Tricks And Tips 101" indoctrination instead of US History, so it's worst moments and mistakes aren't repeated.
CW you are wrong on this one.
The Constitution is specific in the use of the word PERSON, that is the reason the murderers at Gitmo get lawyers, and the reason the feds have lost every appeal in the fed courts up to and including SCOTUS
Any person in the jurisdiction of the USA wins that fight.
If you want to stop immigration, you will have to do it by NATION OF ORIGIN. That has been done beginning in 1924, when we halted the policies since founding until then.
Epa, you're going to have to explain further. Are you telling me it is a RIGHT that a PERSON in another country has to immigrate to this country?
Hi Epa,
I have just re-read the Constitution, and I found no rules about who we allow to immigrate into our country. Maybe the first Amendment is somewhat relevant, although the wording makes it unclear. It says Congress isn't allowed to make a law that respects (or perhaps is about) establishing a religion (or a religious organization).
But even if that means Congress cannot pass a law that has anything to do with a religion (even a law that restricts a particular religion from immigrating), Congress is allowed to make an amendment to the Constitution. And even if we tried really hard and had fifty million signatures and a national movement, and it still didn't happen, the effort to add the amendment itself would go a long way toward educating the public on this issue.
And there is actually another way to approach this kind of restriction on immigration: We have laws that disallow criminals or known political enemies from immigrating, don't we? It wouldn't be too much of a jump to say if someone says they are a Muslim, then we assume they endorse the content of Islamic doctrine, which makes them seditious, and then make a law that prohibits anyone who rejects the established authority of the United States government.
Epa, I have two questions for you:
1. If it WAS possible, do you think it would be a good idea to restrict or prohibit Muslim immigration?
2. If it was absolutely impossible, what would you suggest as a first alternative target or goal?
Adapted from Dr. Peter Hammond's book: Slavery, Terrorism & Islam:
Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat
When politically correct, tolerant, and culturally diverse societies
agree to Muslim demands for their religious privileges, some of the
other components tend to creep in as well. Here's how it works.
As long as the Muslim population remains around or under 2% in any given
country, they will be for the most part be regarded as a peace-loving
minority, and not as a threat to other citizens. This is the case in:
United States -- Muslim 0.6%
Australia -- Muslim 1.5%
Canada -- Muslim 1.9%
China -- Muslim 1.8%
Italy -- Muslim 1.5%
Norway -- Muslim 1.8%*
*At 2% to 5%, they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and
disaffected groups, often with major recruiting from the jails and among
street gangs. This is happening in:
Denmark -- Muslim 2%
Germany -- Muslim 3.7%
United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7%
Spain -- Muslim 4%
Thailand -- Muslim 4.6%**
From 5% on, they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their
percentage of the population. For example, they will push for the
introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby
securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure
on supermarket chains to feature halal on their shelves -- along with
threats for failure to comply. This is occurring in:
France -- Muslim 8%
Philippines -- Muslim 5%
Sweden -- Muslim 5%
Switzerland -- Muslim 4.3%
The Netherlands -- Muslim 5.5%
Trinidad & Tobago -- Muslim 5.8%
At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them
to rule themselves (within their ghettos) under Sharia, the Islamic Law.
The ultimate goal of Islamists is to establish Sharia law over the
entire world.**
When Muslims approach 10% of the population, they tend to increase
lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions. In Paris ,
we are already seeing car-burnings. Any non-Muslim action offends Islam,
and results in uprisings and threats, such as in Amsterdam , with
opposition to Mohammed cartoons and films about Islam. Such tensions are
seen daily, particularly in Muslim sections, in:
Guyana -- Muslim 10%
India -- Muslim 13.4%
Israel -- Muslim 16%
Kenya -- Muslim 10%
Russia -- Muslim 15%**
After reaching 20%, nations can expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad
militia formations, sporadic killings, and the burnings of Christian
churches and Jewish synagogues, such as in:
Ethiopia -- Muslim 32.8%**
At 40%, nations experience widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks,
and ongoing militia warfare, such as in:
Bosnia -- Muslim 40%
Chad -- Muslim 53.1%
Lebanon -- Muslim 59.7%*
*
From 60%, nations experience unfettered persecution of non-believers of
all other religions (including non-conforming Muslims), sporadic ethnic
cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon, and Jizya, the tax
placed on infidels, such as in:
Albania -- Muslim 70%
Malaysia -- Muslim 60.4%
Qatar -- Muslim 77.5%
Sudan -- Muslim 70%**
After 80%, expect daily intimidation and violent jihad, some State-run
ethnic cleansing, and even some genocide, as these nations drive out the
infidels, and move toward 100% Muslim, such as has been experienced and
in some ways is on-going in:
Bangladesh -- Muslim 83%
Egypt -- Muslim 90%
Gaza -- Muslim 98.7%
Indonesia -- Muslim 86.1%
Iran -- Muslim 98%
Iraq -- Muslim 97%
Jordan -- Muslim 92%
Morocco -- Muslim 98.7%
Pakistan -- Muslim 97%
Palestine -- Muslim 99%
Syria -- Muslim 90%
Tajikistan -- Muslim 90%
Turkey -- Muslim 99.8%
United Arab Emirates -- Muslim 96%**
100% will usher in the peace of 'Dar-es-Salaam' -- the Islamic House of
Peace. Here there's supposed to be peace, because everybody is a Muslim,
the Madrasses are the only schools, and the Koran is the only word, such
as in:
Afghanistan -- Muslim 100%
Saudi Arabia -- Muslim 100%
Somalia -- Muslim 100%
Yemen -- Muslim 100%
Unfortunately, peace is never achieved, as in these 100% states the most
radical Muslims intimidate and spew hatred, and satisfy their blood lust
by killing less radical Muslims, for a variety of reasons.
'Before I was nine I had learned the basic canon of Arab life. It was me
against my brother; me and my brother against our father; my family
against my cousins and the clan; the clan against the tribe; the tribe
against the world, and all of us against the infidel. -- Leon Uris, 'The
Haj'
It is important to understand that in some countries, with well under
100% Muslim populations, such as France, the minority Muslim populations
live in ghettos, within which they are 100% Muslim, and within which
they live by Sharia Law. The national police do not even enter these
ghettos. There are no national courts nor schools nor non-Muslim
religious facilities. In such situations, Muslims do not integrate into
the community at large. The children attend madrasses. They learn only
the Koran. To even associate with an infidel is a crime punishable with
death. Therefore, in some areas of certain nations, Muslim Imams and
extremists exercise more power than the national average would indicate.*
Thanks for that comment, ZT. I hope you don't mind, but I copied it onto the comments on my article on Citizen Warrior. Excellent.
In fact, I created a blog post out of it on another blog of mine, and I will give you more credit if you give me more information. Here's where I posted it: More Muslims, More Trouble.
Post a Comment