08 February 2018

God bless Phillip Parrish.

Phillip Parrish is a candidate for governor in Minnesota, swimming bravely against the Minnesota dhimmi tide.
A long-shot Republican gubernatorial candidate is getting national attention for writing that he does not consider Islam a faith and that it is "the antithesis of the Constitution."

Phillip Parrish, of Kenyon, wrote the comments in an email to Community Interfaith Dialogue on Islam founder Regina Mustafa. . . .

* * * *

Mustafa posted the email exchanges on her Facebook page. Since then, Parrish's response has drawn sharp criticism from [so-called] civil rights organizations. The Southern Poverty Law Center wrote about Parrish's comments on its "Hatewatch" blog. . . .

* * * *

"I see myself as a person attempting to expose those who are attempting to set up rules and laws and regulations contrary to the U.S. Constitution," Parrish said. As a U.S. Naval intelligence officer, he said he has extensive knowledge of Islam.

"It's causing harm to people. Thousands of analysts like myself, thousands of law enforcement specialists have been trying to tell leadership this same message for over 20 years. And no one seems to want to listen or they live in some kind of utopic world of no, people really don't think like that. They don't really mean to cut somebody's hand off because they stole something. They don't really mean to put someone to death because they defiled themselves with an unclean woman. They don't really mean to rape little boys on Thursday night because the imam gave them permission to do that," Parrish said.

Mustafa rejected the idea that her invitation was in any way insincere. She said she is deeply disturbed by Parrish's comments, saying they demonstrate a lack of understanding about Islam. She said Muslims in America have demonstrated a respect for both the U.S. Constitution and their religion and his comments are unfair to the Muslim men and women who have served in the U.S. armed forces.[1]

Ms. Mustafa – whose hijab just screams “U.S. citizen” – says “Muslims in America have demonstrated a respect for both the U.S. Constitution and their [own?] religion.” Now that’s what you call a stretcher. Let’s take a quick cruise through some basic doctrines of Islam and dip into current Muslim thinking to get a handle on the deception that this woman is peddling.

First, Muslim law, shariah law, is considered by Muslims to be superior to any manmade law, e.g., the U.S. Constitution. A Muslims who takes the oath of allegiance to the U.S. in any naturalization ceremony or swears elsewhere to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States by definition swears a false oath.

Then there’s the problem of separatism and non-assimilation. Do Muslims want to fit in as loyal citizens of our Constitutional republic?

The former Muslim, Dr. Patrick Sookhdeo, warned about the Islamicization of Europe, saying it is “a careful and deliberate strategy” planned by the Islamic Council of Europe which instructed Muslims “to get together into viable communities, set up mosques, community centres and Islamic schools. To resist assimilation, they must group themselves geographically in areas of high Muslim concentration. According to Sookhdeo, their ultimate goal is Islamic rule in Europe.”

Mr. Sookhdeo knows what he’s talking about. There are 751 Zones Urbaines Sensibles in greater France – “no go” zones. That isn’t assimilation. That’s a carbuncle. Can I say that? This is a problem in N. America as well.

Underlying this separatism and isolation are basic Muslim beliefs about infidels. The Koran (98:6) calls infidels (kuffar) – that is to say, us chickens – “the most vile of created beings.” The Shia brand of Islam considers infidels as unclean, on the same level as dogs, dead bodies, and excrement. The Koran (9:28) agrees: “Disbelievers are unclean” and (2:10) diseased.

The Koran also commands (9:123 ): “Believers, make war on the infidels who dwell around you” and makes clear (8:59) that “infidels should not think that they can get away from us. Prepare against them whatever arms and weaponry you can muster so that you may terrorize them.” Three weeks ago, Muslims murdered a man in Sinai for having a cross tattoo. Mission accomplished!

Finally, the Koran’s mandates the murder of Muslim apostates. In 1978, scum-sucking al-Azhr, the Egyptian Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs, ordered the death of an Egyptian apostate from Islam. Religious fanaticism anyone? First Amendment in the landfill is more like it.

I haven’t even touched on the issues of FGM, slavery, polygamy, and honor killings. Anyone still think that Muslims have demonstrated a respect for our Constitution, our religions, or anything else about us infidels? The "propositional nation" idea is a damn lie but, working with that concept for the next 10 seconds, let's ask just what proposition(s) do plain-vanilla Muslims in America accept?

Mr. Phillips knows what he’s talking about. Bogus hysteria has been the predictable result.

Mustafa is sure right about one thing. Muslims do respect their religion. That's the problem right there in a nutshell. They need to abjure or get out. Steady as she goes isn't an option. You know that's true if you have half a brain and can see five years into the future. Or have been paying attention.

Notes
[1] "Candidate under fire for calling Islam 'antithesis of Constitution.'" By Heather J. Carlson, Post-Bulletin, 1/19/18 (emphasis added).

2 comments:

NITZAKHON said...

I fear the "Spanish Solution" may become the only option.

http://redpilljew.blogspot.com/2018/01/the-islamic-invasion-and-spanish.html

Col. B. Bunny said...

Amen to every word you wrote. Muslins intend conquest. The treason class opened the gates to them. Population transfer is inescapable.

We're light years from having the will to save our nation's and it's the rare person who knows the left intends destruction of our civilization.

No muslins can remain any more than a surgeon can leave a little gangrene. I hope for hard, hard times where our accursed prosperity no longer breeds thus fatal complacency and stupidity. The problems caused by liberalism (and pure malevolence) can only be solved by illiberal means.