Some Good News, Europe May Be Waking Up

The numinously neutral and peaceful Swiss have voted 57.5 to 42.5 to ban the erection of more minarets in their country. Great news which Daniel Pipes thinks may validate the support of realistic policies inhibiting the spread of practical submission to Islam in the rest of Europe.

There is certainly a significant element of racism (or whatever we’re calling religious bias these days) in that Swiss vote; but that does not negate the fact that continued encouragement of immigration of Muslims who have no intention of assimilating into the existing culture of Europe (and the U.S.) is madness since it will almost inevitably lead to a murderous clash.

That it was the usually quiet, low-profile, un-newsworthy, politically boring,
neutral Swiss who suddenly roared their fears about Islam only enhances their
votes’ impact.

Hopefully it’s not too late for a line to be drawn without widespread bloodshed.

http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2009/11/swiss-ban-minarets

I also posted this at Zombie Contentions:
http://ckmac.com/thewholething/2009/11/some-good-news-europe-may-be-waking-up/

A great headline for a picture

"The couple in happier times, before Hassan removed his wife's head."

No word on what he did with her head. Maybe he had one of his other wives cook it up for him with some fava beans.

http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/timblair/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/hassan_chop/

Mark Steyn also penned a great headline for his post on National Review's blog The Corner - "Headless body in gutless press." Steyn wonders why this member of the "Religion of Peace" didn't get as much newspaper publicity when he beheaded his wife as he got when he founded a TV station devoted to showing how moderate, reasonable and non-violent Muslims are.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YWVlZDFkN2RmOGE1YWMzMmY5YjBiZThkYTIxN2Q5ZDU=

Update: It just gets better and better. The Council on American Islamic Relations gave this fellow an award in 2007. In fairness I have to note that their's no evidence he was carrying his wife's head in a bowling ball bag when they gave him the award. A tip of the hat to Greg Pollowitz of National Review, who posted the link to this picture on The Corner.

http://pa.cair.com/content/image.php?Side=gallery&folder=19&img=45

No word on wether the Archbishop of Canterbury has beheaded his wife, or wether he thinks that beheading one's wife should be legal under the sort of Sharia law he advocates.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/4631128/Archbishop-of-Canterbury-Society-is-coming-round-to-my-views-on-sharia.html

You can hardly improve on this kind of stuff

"A prominent Saudi Islamic cleric has issued a fatwa, or religious edict, against Mickey Mouse, whom he characterized as an agent of Satan sent to corrupt young minds.

Sheikh Mohammed Al-Munajid told Saudi Arabia's Al-Majd Television that his beef with Mickey is that he is a mouse, a creature that Islam sees as "repulsive and corrupting."

Al-Munajid explained that Islamic law refers to the mouse as "little corrupter" and a creature that is "steered by Satan," and grants permission to all Muslims to "kill [mice] in all cases."
Therefore, according to Islamic law, insisted the sheikh, "Mickey Mouse should be killed."


This is so hilariously stupid and twisted on its own that I'm at a loss for how to make it better. . .

. . . so I'll just say of Imam Al-Moron bin Fudd, as Bugs Bunny would, "What a Maroon!"

http://www.israeltoday.co.il/default.aspx?tabid=178&nid=17181

Hat tip to Mark Krikorian of National Review and the Center for Immigration Studies who found and linked to this incredible item on the web.

Some Muslims don't want to convert us by the sword

Stephen Schwartz is always interesting even though I've disagreed with his articles as many times as I've agreed with them. In this short interview with John J. Miller of National Review he explains Sufism, a very old tradition which is a whole different thing from the sort of Islam most people are familiar with.

http://radio.nationalreview.com/betweenthecovers/post/?q=ZDNmZjNhYTkxMWE0MDEyMGQwMTYzNGEwZWM1NTBjMmM=

On the other hand, Michael Ledeen of National Review has pointed out that Iran's version of congress just voted 196 to 7 to pass a law that makes it an official death penalty offense for a Muslim to convert to another religion. Formerly in Iran the neighbors just stoned or stabbed the miscreant to death, informal like, if someone got that far out of line.

One hundred and ninety-six to seven! Sounds like it was a pretty popular law that aroused a lot of enthusiasm. The article doesn't say whether the Iranian congressmen - somehow I doubt there are any congresswomen in Iran - the article doesn't say whether the congressjihadis were jumping up and down, shooting guns in the air and waving big throat-cutting knives around after the vote. It also doesn't say whether the 196 who voted "Yea" immediately cut the throats of the 7 who voted "Nay;" or whether they did it later after the dudes got their day in Sharia Court. I guess a news story can't cover everything.

http://www.thememriblog.org/iran/blog_personal/en/9840.htm