Sunday, August 13, 2006

Our tolerance is naïve
“It is a war with a cultural and ideological component that is lavishly financed by easy oil money from states like Saudi Arabia that we have long (and foolishly) regarded as ‘moderates’ and ‘friends’. It is a war utilising sophisticated technology for destruction and communications, and equally sophisticated techniques for inculcating lethal extremism.” – Richard Perle

Read the article: We should not tolerate the preachers of jihad
No, Mr Perle, we should not; and nor should we tolerate the explosive growth of Islam in the West!

Mark Alexander

2 comments:

George Mason said...

My Encarta Dictionary has two definitions of "tolerance":

"1. The acceptance of the differing views of other people, e.g. in religious or political matters, and fairness toward the people who hold these different views.

2. The act of putting up with somebody or something irritating or otherwise unpleasant."

Definition 1. is the pabulum sold by all those who are such relativists that they hold that all views are equal--equally good--and no once can possibly say that there is any "bad" view. This is the approach to facts and truth which is just killing us in the West.

Definition 2. is far closer to the truth with regard to Islam and Muslims.

When someone advocates your beheading, your country's take over and destruction, and world enslavement to Islam, "toleration" ended a long time ago.

Imagine a bar with shot glasses, each containing a liquid. And one of those shot glasses contains ricin. The others are just innocuous liquids. Is it right to be tolerant and say that one liquid is just as good as another, and there are no bad liquids; therefore, we should "tolerate" all liquids.

If you buy this "tolerance" stuff, then belly up to the shot glass bar and drink up.

SlantRight 2.0 said...

It is time for a huge dose of intolerance to a religion that is not escaping persecution, instead advocates the destruction of the society it lives within. That is Islam.