Imam Sarkozy: "The Muslim faith has nothing to do with the insane acts of this man"

Allahu akbar! If Sarko doesn’t know, who does?

Lets ask the rabbi:
“Muslims like Jews, Jews like Muslims”–no matter how many Jews get murdered. Look away, fools…. the real problem is “Islamophobia”
Al Arabiya:
Such barbaric acts are against religion, and human values. Those who commit such crimes in the name of Islam are murderous infidels. Many French people of Arab origin are hoping that the killer does not belong to any Islamic group, because this would damage the image of Islam and the Arabs in France.  Al Arabiya
Actually — you guessed it — it cautioned against “Islamophobia.” Yet again a Muslim group claims victim status after a jihad attack, instead of making any genuine effort to prevent the next one. This obviously gives the lie to their claims of moderation and their entire public posture, but no one seems to notice or care. “Extremist suspect upends French presidential race,” by Elaine Ganley for the Associated Press, March 22 via JW

Jihad — you know. It’s a venerable Methodist concept. And the Qur’an? That’s just an old cookbook. For we all know that Muhammad Merah’s bloody massacre had nothing to do with Islam, right? “French shooting suspect was recruiting boys for jihad: report,” by Paul Koring for the Globe and Mail, March 22

Forsane Alizza is a telling indication of how the stealth jihadists who promote the Muslim Brotherhood-coined concept of “Islamophobia” are working hand-in-glove with violent jihadists. “French killings refocus fears on ‘solo’ acts of terror,” by Paul Cruickshank and Tim Lister for CNN, March 21:

Muhammad Merah called himself an “Islamic warrior,” but Mohammed Moussaoui asserts that he actually misunderstood the religion to which he had dedicated his life and for which he was fighting. So what is Mohammed Moussaoui doing in mosques in France to make sure that more Muslims there don’t misunderstand Islam in the same way that Muhammad Merah did? In fact, no Muslim community in any Western country has any such program or activity — nothing at all to fight in mosques and madrassas against this disturbingly pervasive understanding of Islam that they insist is in error.

One can only conclude that they don’t do anything serious against this understanding of Islam because they don’t really think it “contradicts Islam” at all. Western authorities should act accordingly. But they won’t, of course. They will take Mohammed Moussaoui’s words at face value and go away confirmed in their complacency.

“French shooter’s acts contradict Islam: Muslim leader,” from Expatica, March 21 (thanks to JW)

Muhammad Merah’s murders had everything to do with Islam: he claimed affiliation with al-Qaeda and may have trained with the Taliban, both of which are explicitly and ostentatiously Muslim groups that justify all their actions by reference to the Qur’an and Sunnah. He claimed to be a mujahid, which is a warrior of jihad, which is an Islamic theological and legal concept. He killed Muslim soldiers who fought in the infidel military — something that only someone who considered one’s loyalty to the umma to trump all other loyalties would have done. So grounded is Merah’s massacre in Islam that it is virtually inconceivable that he would have carried it out had he not been a Muslim. And so Sarkozy is, like every other leader in the West, whistling in the dark, trying to pretend that there is no problem when there is a huge problem, and basing the future of his nation on the fantasy that the overwhelming majority of Muslims in France do not believe the same things Muhammad Merah believed.

Meanwhile, he says he is going to make habitually visiting jihadi websites a crime, which would land me in the bastille fairly quickly. I hope that French law enforcement will not just go on the visiting of such websites alone, but will combine that with other factors to make an intelligent assessment of Muslims who may be plotting jihad murder. In any case, as long as Sarkozy and the French establishment continues in denial about the nature, source and magnitude of the threat, monitoring websites may stop a few jihad attacks, but it will do nothing to stop the Islamization of French society by gradual capitulation to Sharia demands. The hijab ban was one step to prevent that, but Sarkozy is going to have to be prepared to be much more “implacable in defending our values” than he has been up to now, if he is really serious about doing so.

From “Toulouse siege: live” in the Telegraph, March 22 (thanks to David):

12.44 President Nicolas Sarkozy warned that those who visit extemist [sic] websites will be severely punished:Quote France has shown its indignation and grit but has not allowed anger to take over.

The Muslim faith has nothing to do with the insane acts of this man. Before targeting Jewish children, he targeted other Muslims.

We must be implacable in defending our values. We will not allow this ideology to affect us.

From now on, any person who habitually consults websites that advocate terrorism or that call for hatred and violence will be punished by the law.

France will not tolerate forced recruitment or ideological indoctrination on its soil.

6 thoughts on “Imam Sarkozy: "The Muslim faith has nothing to do with the insane acts of this man"”

  1. So Muslim faith has nothing to do with the insane acts of this Merah… what should be understood by this? compulsive appeasement, compulsive ignorance or compulsive stupidity? Or all three in one? It’s terrifying to think that more innocent people may die due to people who should be sent to an asylum instead of being voted every 4 years. How could things go down like this…

  2. It’s quite revealing to see the mainstream media write about his so-called reasons for murdering people. Apparently he disagreed with France banning the burka. And he disagreed with French troops being sent overseas. Well those are not legitimate reasons for picking up a gun and murdering innocent people.

    In a Western democracy, those are reasons to get yourself round to the nearest polling station and vote.

    There was an election on, after all …

    So these efforts by some journalists in the mainstream media to legitimise this murderer’s actions by legitimising his complaints, just don’t work.

    Having those complaints is not (logically speaking) a sufficient condition for anyone to murder innocent people.

    There’s something else needed for one to become a mujahideen & murder French troops fighting against your brothers in the ummah & then follow that up with some good old-fashioned Jew-murdering.

    What could it be …

  3. It’s disappointing to see our media pretend to “explain” Mohamed whatshisname’s motives, when it’s obvious that there’s a huge area of investigation which is verboten.

    How can you carry out a genuine investigation into anything, if you’re not allowed to follow the facts wherever they lead? And isn’t it the press’s role in a functioning democracy to investigate and inform?

    AQ is a Muslims only club. Becoming a “mujahideen” is a job that is only open to devout Muslims. Of course not every Muslim living in Toulouse is going to go round to that Jewish school and start killing kids. But if there is a crossover here, however deep in the layers of belief one must dig to find it, then that ought to at least be discussed.

    If journalists really want to examine Mohamed Merah’s motives then they need to look closely at his Weltanschauung, & examine any foundational premises of his overall philosophy which come from the pages of the Koran.

    That may shed some light here …

  4. Nick,

    Nick wrote: In a Western democracy, those are reasons to get yourself round to the nearest polling station and vote.

    Actually the demographic threat is far bigger then wanton acts of Jihadi violence.

    Its the demographic threat manifesting itself via the ballot box, that is the nightmare scenario.

Comments are closed.