What if they gave a war and only one side came?

Back in the heady days of the 60s and even in the hangover years of the 70s there was a popular expression amongst the Vietnam weary and ideological youth. “What if they gave a war and no one came?”

They nearly had it right. But they didn’t ask the question that might matter a great deal more.

War has been declared on the west. Tragically, only one side is engaged – the most pernicious enemy of liberal values in history. We aren’t fighting back. Most refuse to admit that there is a war. Acknowledging the war, would be an admission that our perfect utopia is not loved by all. Instead of defending ourselves, we have large think tanks and even entire branches of governments and even in some ways entire governments looking to find ways to surrender.

While discussing Islam with my friend Fred, he made the following comment:
“I used to view big corporations as all powerful. Now I see them as weaker than a single Muslim complaining about some minor issue”

Sony was ready to release a new PS3 game. Within the game there were a couple of lines from the Koran intermixed with the music. A Muslim was offended and complained to Sony. On the surface, the issue appears to be a minor incident that gives all of us something to chuckle about. But, if one thinks about the continual erosion of our freedoms, in favor of Islam, the issue is of far greater importance

The costs to Sony are likely in the millions of dollars.

They would have had to recall the game, (this we know they did) re write the code, do a new promotion and advertising etc. For all we know they hired an Imam to make sure there is nothing offensive left in the game to Islam although I’m reasonably sure they can’t have done this as there seems to be little not offensive to the religion of peace.

While Sony’s concessions may have temporarily saved them from Islamic rage, they lost control of their company in the process. No doubt, Sony spent millions of dollars correcting the offense. Think about it – one Muslim complaint managed to bring an international corporation to its knees.

Sony is quite hypocritical on the matter of religious sensitivities as we see by their reaction to complaints by Christians. So we know this isnt a matter of Sony’s wishing not to offend; but of fear.

Sony’s submission to Islam is a profoundly important story. Yet, most are focused on the humor of the incident, rather then the broad sweeping consequences. When one follower of Islam can force a major corporation to delay the release of their product, and spend millions of dollars, it should be crystal clear, that we are in serious trouble. Governments and corporations continually submit to the irrational demands of Islamists. Our freedoms are willingly surrendered to tyrants who will never be satisfied, until they have complete control over every aspect of our lives.

This is far from an isolated incident. A few years ago, Burger King had to pull all its ice cream products as one Muslim claimed that the little squiggly symbol they used to represent soft serve ice cream resembled the little squiggly Arabic word for Allah. Clearly the Danish cartoon riots had their intended effect.

Lets try and get this in context shall we?

One man in the UK decided that a symbol on an ice cream cone looked kinda like a symbol he felt was sacred, the Muslim Council of Britain backed him on it and a major corporation had to take a large loss to not cause offense or more likely, not live in fear of having its facilities and personnel attacked.

A division of the Scottish police force had to apologize for an add they did featuring a puppy. Muslims you see, do not like dogs so an apology had to be issued and the add pulled right away. This of course within the UK.

Companies like Burger King and Sony would rather cave to Islamists, than face the inevitable violent repercussions that are inflicted upon any one who dares to offend Islam. These companies, and our governments, resort to quick fixes in an effort to quell Islamist rage. Every time Islamists are appeased and placated, they are emboldened. With their concessions to Islam, companies like Sony, enable our enemies to destroy our freedoms, and control us.

A single Muslim registers a complaint that something is offensive to him because of his faith and large institutions immediately take massive losses or at least take on massive expense to placate him as he is likely to get support from Muslim groups resulting in anything and everything from costly bad publicity to destruction of property and even death of personnel. Often these offenses are arbitrary with no basis even on their own scripture.

These complaints didn’t occur until the third wave of Jihad against the west began. Now every Muslim whim must be pacified. Riots over pictures of Mohamed didn’t occur prior to the Mohamed cartoons. Many Muslim books did include images of their war lord. The riots surrounding the Mohamed cartoons, was a strategy of war. They quickly established the supremacy of Islam over the infidel, instilled fear into our hearts, and provoked us to submit, rather then defend ourselves. Frankly, it was pure genius on their part, and has worked staggeringly well.

The Mohamed cartoon experience put terror into the hearts of our politicians, governments, corporations and ordinary citizens. Now the main criteria for decisions are, avoid offending Islamists at all costs, despite the financial, societal and personal loss. No one wants to risk Islamic violence, death and destruction of property. It is crucial, in order to keep the peace, that Islam is appeased. Concessions to Islamists, erode the fabric of our societies. We have thrown in the towel. We aren’t engaging our enemies to protect our values. Instead, we genuflect on bended knee, alter our way of life, and apologize. In true Dhimmi fashion, we submit.

All organizations, private or public, are under the absolute whim of any individual Muslim. Overt acts of terrorism aren’t necessary, because the desired affect brought about by the Mohamed cartoon incident, is a success. Instead of holding onto our values, or the control of our countries and corporations, we willingly submit even for minor, irrational complaints.

How does one distinguish between surrender to an enemy who wishes to destroy your culture values and rights, and submission to irrational demands of political correctness which demands we break our own laws of equality in favor of advantaging groups perceived to be discriminated against?

Is there any differentiation between surrender to an enemy, who wishes to destroy our culture, values and rights, and submission to political correctness?

Is there any difference between surrendering to an invading army that is determined to establish hegemony over us, and self-imposed restrictions that enable our enemies to impose their hegemony upon our lives, without resistance?

Twenty years ago, maybe a distinction could have been made. Today the irrevocable damage caused by either approach is identical.

The question arises yet again…

“When is a series of incidents actually acknowledged as policy?”

Muslim groups clearly recognize the benefits of making complaints for money, power, and the goal of forcing free societies to submit to Islam. Every time a company trivializes freedom, so as not to offend Islam, dangerous precedents are established and In fact are well entrenched at this point.

Our Governments set similar precedents when they make exceptions to our laws in order to accommodate one group. One example is Aly Hindy’s open admission, that he performed many polygamous marriage ceremonies in Ontario. To date, the Ontario Provincial Government, and the Federal Government continue to ignore his open violation of our polygamy laws. Hindy is free to break our laws, erode our country, and institute Sharia Law in Canada.

Acts of submission such as Sony’s, and the Canadian Government, will lead to more demands from Islamists. Until we draw a line in the sand, hold onto our systems, values and freedoms, and say enough, the demise of our countries will continue, until we find ourselves in the quagmire of the 7th century.

It is a futile exercise to continue questioning whether or not we are on a slippery slope towards our demise. There is more than sufficient evidence to prove that we are. As illustrated in this article, there are countless examples of our submission to Islamic political agendas. The important question is whether or not we can stop ourselves from any further submission to Islamists, and reverse the damage that has already occurred within our societies.

Either way, the message is out. The infidel will calculate cost benefits and adjust to the cheapest immediate solution. Fjordman is right (again) capitalism in this instance fails us. Governments (who should know better) and mighty corporations both fail to figure in to their cost benefit analysis the expense of Sharia law which they are helping to create faster than the Islamists could have hoped for.

Eeyore with lots of excellent help from friends

Addendum: The story of the Somali’s and the meat packing plant is a rather perfect example of Islamic use of politica correctness to subject us all to sharia law. This link contains the most recent developments such as CAIR law suits and links to the whole story since it began.

About Eeyore

Canadian artist and counter-jihad and freedom of speech activist as well as devout Schrödinger's catholic

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *