>No wonder notorious islamocoddler Chris Christie endorses him. Mitt Romney doubled down on his prior exhibition of dhimmitude (when he falsely said that jihad is not a part of islam) by claiming that islam is not inherently violent.

Via Atlas Shrugs:

Not Mitt Romney. No way. No how.
Apparently, unlike most everything else, Mitt Romney has not flip-flopped on his position on jihad and Islam. Back in July 2009, I wrote in a post entitled, “Why Romney Won’t be President” that Romney would not be president because he said something so fundamentally and unabashedly wrong about America’s greatest mortal threat that he was unfit to be President: “Jihadism Is not part of Islam.” Yes, he said that. That is frightening coming from a Presidential candidate. Instead of spending the ensuing years studying jihad, Romney appears hardwired for delusion in his latest remarks.
The fact that Romney knows peaceful Muslims is purely anecdotal. I believe that most Muslims are secular and have no desire to strap one on. But that does not mean that Islam is not inherently violent. The ideology is the most violent and radical on the face of the earth. What history books is Romney reading……Dr. Seuss? How did Romney miss over 270 million victims in over a millennium of jihadi wars, land appropriations, cultural annihilations and enslavements? How did Romney miss the close to 18,000 Islamic attacks since 911? How did Romney miss the revolutions in Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, etc.? How did Romney miss the jihad on the Jews and Christians and Hindus and Sikhs?
There are hundreds of millions of jihadis, what’s Romney smokin’?
Mitt Romney: Islam is not an inherently violent faith
Cedar Rapids, Ia. – Mitt Romney responded today to a call for a tougher stance against Muslims by saying that most Muslims are peaceful people who deserve respect.
The issue came up during a question-and-answer session at a campaign stop here this morning. A man rose from the audience, claimed he had many Muslim friends, but said, “I have never heard one Muslim condemn Islamic jihad or terrorism. I see Islamic jihad as one of the greatest threats to America and the western world. Are you going to continue to give Islam and Islamic jihad in this country a pass like everybody before you continues to do? The only people that call Islam a religion of peace are the Muslims, and they are the most violent religion in the world.”

Romney said radical, violent Islamists pose a threat to Americans and others around the world. However, he said, “they take a very different view of Islam than the Muslims I know.” He noted that he was raised in the Detroit area, which has a large Muslim population. “They are peace-loving and America-loving individuals. I believe that very sincerely. I believe people of the Islamic  faith do not have to subscribe to the idea of radical, violent jihadism.”

What you believe is irrelevant, Mr. Romney. Just the facts, and they fly in the face of your fantasy.
Romney sounds like ………. Obama.
Romney cannot lead the free world. A basic understanding of Islam is essential in formulating policy and strategy in dealing with Iran, Israel, Egypt, Algeria, Libya, Tunisia, Europe, Eurasia, etc.  RTR

Via Jihad Watch:

Romney: “I believe people of the Islamic faith do not have to subscribe to the idea of radical, violent jihadism”
What about nonradical, nonviolent jihadism? What about the Islamic supremacist imperative to assert Sharia over other legal codes by nonviolent as well as violent means? Romney doesn’t address that, and I doubt he is even aware that such an imperative exists. 

There is also this, from Jihad Watch, in 2009:

For Mitt Romney, “jihadism” is apparently nothing but his label for what he considers a heretical, militant branch of the Religion of Peace. Indeed, the quotation below indicates Romney himself is firmly within the bounds of Beltway orthodoxy with respect to the nature of Islamic teachings. MORE HERE

Via Dan Gilgoff, US News, June 3, 2009:

With Obama’s big speech to the Muslim world in the offing, I asked Mitt Romney in an interview yesterday about a major speech on national security that he gave on Monday at the Heritage Foundation (see above video). In it, Romney referred to Islam only insofar as he referred to “jihadism,” a term he used four times in the address, and to “mullahs” and “ayatollahs.”
I asked Romney how he’d respond to Muslim complaints that his speech characterized Islam in entirely sinister terms. His response surprised me:

I didn’t refer to Islam at all, or to any other religion for that matter. I spoke about three major threats America faces on a long term basis. Jihadism is one of them, and that is not Islam. If you want my views on Islam, it’s quite straightforward. Islam is one of the world’s great religions and the great majority of people in Islam want peace for themselves and peace with their maker. They want to raise families and have a bright future.
There is, however, a movement in the world known as jihadism. They call themselves jihadists and I use the same term. And this jihadist movement is intent on causing the collapse of moderate Muslim states and the assassination of moderate Muslim leaders. It is also intent on causing collapse of other nations in the world. It’s by no means a branch of Islam. It is instead an entirely different entity. In no way do I suggest it is a part of Islam.

Romney sees no connection whatsoever between Islam and the jihadists?  RTR

Mitt Romney is wrong, violence is inherent to islam, is has been ever since its “prophet” mohammed’s murderous genocidal rampages, it is written into the texts that islam considers holy. Jihad is commanded by islam. See HERE and HERE for more information. unfortunately, Mitt’s troubling dhimmitude is yet another symptom of the islamocoddling “politically correct” suicidal idiotic mental sickness that has infected much of the Republican party, as I have written about previously HERE, HERE, HERE, and HERE.

Marisol at Jihad Watch said it quite well in 2009:

Ultimately, not to accept that the jihadist ideology comes from Allah’s own commands as conveyed by Muhammad is to vastly underestimate the depth of the jihadist threat. And to base public policy on such underestimation, wishful thinking, and outright denial is to invite disastrous consequences for the near future.

A picture is worth a thousand words, so I will give the final word on Mitt’s dhimmitude to the great anti-jihad artist and writer Bosch Fawstin, who knows a more than a few things about islam and the jihad:

We need a President who is not afraid to tell the truth about islam’s bloody history and the ill intentions that islamic supremacists have for Americans and freedom loving people everywhere. America simply cannot survive another useful idiot for islamization leading this country. Ten years after 3000 of us were murdered on our own soil by islamic jihadi terrorists for islam, and over EIGHTEEN THOUSAND deadly islamic jihad attacks since that horrible day, and our “leaders” still try to tell us that “islam is a religion of peace“. Enough already. Let’s try something different in 2012, let’s put a person in the Oval Office who not only understands the threat, but isn’t afraid to address it honestly and respond appropriately to it. I endorse Rick Santorum for President of the United States, you can read why HERE.

This post is linked at Blazing Cat Fur. Thank you, BCF! 

This post is listed in Larwyn’s Linx at Doug Ross. Thanks, Doug!  

This post is featured at The government-watchdogs Daily. Thank you, I miss Reagan!

This post is linked at American Power. Thanks, Doug!  

This post is linked at iOwnTheWorld. Thank you, BigFurHat!  

This post is linked at 1389 Blog – Counterjihad! Thanks, 1389!  

This post is linked at The Camp Of The Saints. Thank you, Bob! 

Buy Ad Space

Zilla’s Resistance Shop


  • SignPainterGuy
  • quite_rightly
  • Donald Douglas
  • Olave d’Estienne
  • Olave d’Estienne
  • Claudia
  • David Smith
  • Adobe_Walls
  • Xiao Wu
WordPress theme: Kippis 1.15