Wednesday, December 19, 2007


There are two sides to the civilizational suicide coin we are challenged with and both have the element of religiosity--ISLAM, the Will of Allah as noted by his prophet, Mohammed (the Perfect ManTM) dictating how everyone must worship, organize society and submit and

SOCIALISM, the will of the People as espoused by Marx, et al, dictating how everyone must...well...pretty much the same thing as Islam but the main factor is to SUBMIT.

Hold yer hosses--I'm not advocating against religion, organized or otherwise. There is an element built into the vast majority of us that recognizes something larger than ourselves and yearns to understand more clearly, even the atheist's belief (that's belief, a form of faith, without true knowledge) that there is no God.

The forward thinking socialist, having understood that the common person's innate human nature has a selfish side, has made great inroads in the West by promoting the Welfare State. Much less rhetoric regarding the proletariat and much more about Social Security, Universal Health Care, etc. This tactic assures the common person's self-interests are met.

But that's not enough. No, another element must be introduced. Something truly bigger than any individual. Something bigger than any group or country or region or hemisphere--the Earth.

If the fate of the Earth isn't an issue great enough to grab your attention then nothing is.

It's our home planet. It has nurtured us. When the Earth acts up it's a clear sign that it is mad at us.

We must repent and pay homage and respect to the Earth. We must change our wicked ways; sacrifice our way of life; martyr ourselves and our children so our nonexistent children may enjoy the benefits of holy Gaia.

If you've read this far you're probably not drinking the KoolAid. But you may not have yet heard the words of those who would hold you to the ground, force your mouth open, and pour it in.

Following are excerpts from FRONTPAGEMAG.COM

The Global Warming Suicide Cult

By Don Feder | Wednesday, December 19, 2007
The Global Warming movement has been compared to a religion -- albeit one without God, but with a vision of sin and repentance, damnation and salvation.

Not quite.

Real religion is about improving the human condition by encouraging moral conduct in obedience to the will of God. The proponents of Global Warming are creating a suicide cult, which -- if followed to its logical conclusion -- will lead to human extinction.


Ultimately, the Global Warming crusade is a frontal assault on procreation, the family and the future of mankind.

In the December 9th edition of Medical Journal of Australia, Professor Barry Walters urges a one-time "baby levy" of $5,000, followed by an annual tax of $800 per child, on Australian families with more than two children.

"Every newborn baby in Australia represents a potent source of greenhouse gas emissions for an average of 80 years, not simply by breathing but by the profligate consumption of resources typical of our society," writes Walters, who calls childbearing "greenhouse unfriendly behavior."


"Human population growth is the paramount environmental issue," says Ric Oberlink, a spokesman for the ominous-sounding Californians for Population Stabilization. "Global warming is a very serious problem, but it is a subset of the overpopulation problem."

Ric (dropping the consonant is his contribution to conservation) claims the problem isn't just too many people, but too many Americans, who, by our evil nature, will consume too much energy over the course of our lives. Americans are "by far the most voracious consumers and the greatest producers of greenhouse gases per capita of any nation on earth," Ric remarks.


"The population explosion has severely disturbed the ecological relationships between human beings and the environment," the Sierra Club warns. "In recognition of the growing magnitude of this conservation issue, the Sierra Club supports a greatly increased program of education on the need for population control." The left is really into control.

Global Warming fanaticism seems to lend itself to self-loathing. In 1989, David Graber, then a biologist with the National Park Service, was quoted in the Los Angeles Times observing: "Human happiness and certainly human fecundity are not as important as a wild and healthy planet. I know social scientists who remind me that people are part of nature, but it isn't true... We have become a plague upon ourselves and upon Earth. Until such time as homo sapiens should decide to rejoin nature (by wearing natural fibers and living in trees?) some of us can only hope for the right virus to come along."


Is the right plague what Jacques Cousteau had in mind, when he wrote in 1991: "In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 people per day. It is a horrible thing to say, but its just as bad not to say it." A speaker at Gorbachev's 1996 State of the World Forum in San Francisco called for cutting the global population by 90%. He did not specify the method.
Yeah, that Mikhail Gorbachev, formerly red and now green.
Vaclav Klaus, president of the Czech Republic, argues that ambitious environmentalism is the biggest threat to freedom, democracy, the market economy and prosperity.


As someone who lived under communism for most of his life, I feel obliged to say that I see the biggest threat to freedom, democracy, the market economy and prosperity now in ambitious environmentalism, not in communism. This ideology wants to replace the free and spontaneous evolution of mankind by a sort of central (now global) planning.

Ready to line up for recycling a la Soylent Green?

"Soylent Green is people"

OK. I'm not Catholic and the Pope is not my ultimate arbiter for God. But I'm proud he has the stones to say this.

The above portion of the post is the obverse, the facia of the coin--the one that's daily in our face from draconian recycling laws to sin taxes. What of the other side?

Again, I find FRONTPAGEMAG.COM an invaluable resource.,

A Never-Ending War

By Jamie Glazov | Wednesday, December 19, 2007

FP: So what is your understanding of Islam? And who and what is exactly our enemy in this terror war?

Cappi: If anyone takes the time to read the Qur’an the answer to your question is simple and very obvious. For accuracy purposes I read three versions. They all agree in principle. The Qur’an is nothing like the Bible or New Testament. In no way and certainly not in substance or intent is it similar. By the way any belief system can be perverted to nefarious ends but if the system itself is fundamentally benign or moral any perversion of its philosophical premises can be righted. However, when the belief system itself is corrupt or evil no good can come from it. The Qur’an is just such a belief system: it is a “blueprint for war” and for the subjugation of the non-believer. To the extent it deals with any aspect of morality it is similar to the Judeo-Christian ethic but only if this ethic is not in conflict with the goals of Islam’s spread and world conquest.

The Qur’an is filled with endless directives compelling Muslims to convert, conquer or kill non-believers and to conquer the non-Islamic world. Further Islam dictates that the Qur’an must be accepted and followed literally. Apostasy is heresy and punishable by death. It is this belief system that throughout history has caused Muslims to endlessly embark on conquest. In 1400 years of history the only time the West has been at “peace” with Islam was from the end of the Ottoman Empire early in the 20th Century through the end of World War ll. The reason for Islam’s dormancy during this brief period was the overwhelming superiority of the West technologically and economically along with the impoverished and largely uneducated Islamic world. The difference made it impossible for Islam to confront the West in any way. The vast quantity of money flowing into the Middle East from the sale of oil after WWII has allowed Islam to buy what it needs to once again begin its quest. The modern jihad was born.

The oil money has funded the terrorists, the construction of endless mosques and madrassas- Islamic religious schools - throughout the West. Both school and mosque almost all preach the most extreme form of Islam – Wahhabism. Our “friends” the Saudis fund most of these activities.

Perhaps that was a long-winded way of saying that Islam itself is the enemy, not a number of terrorist groups. Terrorism is one of Islam’s tools but it is the religion of Islam that is at war with us. One might ask how can a religion be at war with countries? The brief answer lies in the fact that there is no separation of church and state in Islam. The law of Islam is Shari’ and it is derived from the Qur’an and Haddiths. Every Muslim country in the world is governed by Shari’a. (Turkey is an exception but even it does not violate Shari’a and in fact is suffering an internal struggle to adopt overthrow its secular laws in favor of Shari’a.)

The central theme found throughout the Qur’an and embodied in Shari’a is a concept of a very definite world order. There can exist, according to Islam only two states in the world: dar al Islam - the realm of Islam and dar al harb - the realm of war. If you are not part of Islam you are at war with Islam. The war can take any form, be it terrorism, subversion or economics.

Through Shari’a the religion of Islam and the state of Islam are one. For a Muslim there is no conflict in this regard. The absolute essential theme of every action of every Islamic nation and practicing Muslim is the establishment of Shari’a in every country in the world just as Mohammed commanded through the Qur’an. This has been a driving force for 1400 years.

We just don’t understand it or want to believe it.

Having said we are at war with Islam leaves a Western mind very unsettled. The statement smacks of bigotry or Islamophobia or intolerance at the least. And it is exactly this that is one of Islam’s best weapons against the Western cultures. We cannot deal with the thought of a religion as a mechanism for conquest, we cannot deal with the thought that there are citizens within the West that would, if they could, overthrow our way of life and institute a 7th Century mind set and form of government – remember the Taliban that is the ultimate Islamic goal on a worldwide scale. Because we cannot accept these things intellectually we only win some battles against terrorists but we are losing the broader war.

The premise of being at war with a religion flies in the face of everything we as a tolerant people have been taught and believe in our hearts. Although the premise is sad, the reality is what it is. The facts are what they are regardless of how unpleasant they may be. The challenge to the West is to be able to fight this war while protecting the individual Muslim that is not part of the insane literalism of Islam. And there are many frightened Muslims not part of this endless war. They are afraid to step forth for the consequences are often death. Even in Western countries killings of apostates is not uncommon.
Islamic family love

Aqsa Parvez

'Nuf said?


Anonymous said...

"The Global Warming movement has been compared to a religion -- albeit one without God, but with a vision of sin and repentance, damnation and salvation."

I latched onto thta cuz I am acutely aware of the spiritual concepts that have evolved into secular concepts. For a moment there I could almost see that their is a god and 'secular' is the bastard child of the anti Christ.

Nope, not aC hristian here but;

Our philisophical understandings are derived from supersticion? The supersticious also had a moral code. Lotta ancient rhetoric about widows and orphans the aged and the helpless. Aside from that, fear and sacrifice were the norm.

God kings and royal blood are what is a thing of th past. The rest of their beleifs seem alive and well on both sides of the isle. Beleif in 'unalienable rights' differentiates between the good, the bad, and the ugly. (nother rant)

Anonymous said...

Aqsa Parvez

Followed that story a bit.

I don't think, wonder or suspect. Muslims are afraid of their own beleifs and that is the results of proactive fear.

Anybody that thinks fear is not a strong driving proactive force is confusing fear woth cowardice. IMHO