Jihad Watch Advisory Board Vice President Hugh Fitzgerald with a modest proposal:
Wealth is a weapon of Jihad. And of course, damaging the economies of the Infidels, or causing them to spend money unnecessarily (how much is the Western world now spending to monitor the very Muslim populations that were heedlessly permitted to enter the countries of non-Muslim peoples and polities, without the necessary pondering of the implications of such a move.For Muslim immigrants carry with them in their mental baggage certain immutable items that are completely different from what all non-Muslim immigrants bring with them. When Castro deliberately let loose many criminals (the Mariel Boat people), thereby inflicting them on the United States, that was of course bad enough. But a completely different level of menace and threat is involved with Muslim immigrants throughout the Western world, including those who, when they first arrive, seem entirely inoffensive and unthreatening. But they carry with them a mental meme, a dormant virus, that any number of events or personal setbacks or deliberate inculcation of a more fervent faith can trigger into something more virulent. And dangerous not to the health of the carrier, but to the circumambient Infidels.
The "wealth" weapon can be used to spread mosques and madrasas worldwide -- which is why everything must be done to diminish Saudi and other Arab Muslim revenues. Besides, the more Muslims have to work, and work hard, and the more they have to worry about markets, and pleasing customers, and so on, the less time for using all that free time to become resentful of Islam's place in the world, and its right to dominate, and the perfidy of all non-Muslims, beginning with Israel, which is near at hand, and with the United States, the most powerful and redoubtable of Infidel states, the one least likely to share the appeasement now on view in the bureaucracy of the E.U., and among the assorted hirelings -- such as Chirac -- in European countries.
The Pakistani minister who explicitly recognizes the economic cost to India in policing Kashmir is no different from Bin Laden who, in a recent tape, discussed the economic damage to the United States that he was inflicting. This got no attention; it was as if the expenditure of $300 billion and counting in Iraq and Afghanistan, to at best be left with a democratic, but in the case of Iraq even more fervently Muslim atmosphere than before (it would be wrong to call Ba'athism anything like Kemalism, but as long as it was largely an instrument in Iraq for the Sunni minority to retain power, naturally Islam, insofar as it was a vehicle for the Shi'a minority, would tend to be constrained or, with Saddam Hussein's mosque-building, Battle-of-Qadassiyah invoking, Qur'an-commissioning (and supposedly supplying his own blood for the ink) version of Defender of the Faith, co-opted.That is why the West should cease all economic aid to Muslim countries. Every transfer, beyond the 5-6 trillion dollars already sent to the OPEC countries in the past 30 years (with no serious effort being made to recapture any of those oligiopolistic rents, instead with American leaders continually relying on the vain and inane hope that the Saudis would "moderate" prices were "our staunch allies" when they were nothing of the kind, and never were, and never could be (good god, how stupid people are, how unwilling to do the slightest research, how fixed in their smug assumptions that "everybody" knows to be true, in the same way that "everybody" knows "what the "final settlement" between Israel and the Arabs "has to be" -- more smug assumptions, more nonsense, more failure to think through the overwhelming influence, that cannot be suppressed even if here and there, for a year or five, things appear to be different -- as they did in Turkey for some decades -- of Islam).
The enormous cost, a cost that keeps rising, of monitoring Muslims in the Bilad al-kufr, the Lands of the Infidels, is now permanent. But there are ways to spend money, not on doing the work in Iraq that the Iraqis themselves should pay for and do themselves, or hire others to do, and certainly continuing to give a single dollar more to the vicious regime in Egypt or indeed to any regime that does not accord full equality to its non-Muslim citizens, and that includes every right that Muslims have, to repair their houses of worship, and even to proselytize should they wish (if Muslims are allowed to do so).
Muslims recognize perfectly, and discuss endlessly, the use of wealth as a weapon, just as they do the use of Da'wa and demography. What is puzzling, and more than puzzling infuriating, is the seeming absence of such discussion in the Western world, which has the most to lose from the spread of Islam.
There are many instruments of the Jihad to spread Islam and weaken Infidel societies and peoples. But these instruments are also available to those who are engaged in what may be called the counter-Jihad. Tiptoeing around about all this, and becoming indignant or full of horror when, for example, stories leak out about a proposal for planting "misinformation" -- surely the most obvious thing to be done in a war -- are extraordinary, and reflect, again, the ability of apologists for Islam to successfully throttle discussion, or continue to mislead.
This must not continue.
I am overjoyed to read Hugh's comments. They are right on the money (no pun intended) and a pleasure to read.
One comment: Moslems seem rather immune from the demands of the market. The market always punishes those who ignore it or act against it and this is true of Moslems as well (as it is true of communist giants like China and the old Soviet Union). The problem is that, like the Nazis and Communists, Moslems seem willing to suffer the consequences of non-market behavior. Just my $0.02.
Paying the Jiz hasnt worked to well
Hugh has made these points many times, and cannot repeat himself often enough, because few seem to be listening. And the cost of not listening is paid in lives, fortunes, and damage to what we call 'civilization', that one hopes will not become irreparable.
And I will say something again, that I have said before. An epiphany of sorts for me, an answer to the question, 'When will we have beaten the Jihad?', or if you like, an answer to the less descriptive, politically acceptable, wrongheaded question, 'When will the war on terror be won?': the day that the trillions of barrels of fossil fuels under Islamic sands become worthless is the day we win.
And what are we doing to bring this about?
For the present, the Western ruling classes are not disposed to consider this sort of action. The only sort of politician who will advocate them - if they occur to him - is the vile kind of racist demagogue, the Le Pen or Bossi kind, who would not be bothered if his followers were beating up and murdering innocent Muslims in the streets. As long as these men exist, they will give pre-emptive anti-Muslim measures a bad name. We want to show that we are against Islam but not against individual Muslims, many of whom work, pay their taxes and do no harm to anyone.
This is the answer. Not a nut or bolt or any technology at all. Make them spend their money just trying to build all that they take for granted. No computer chips or spare parts for their cars, no television sets, no satellite dishes... jam satellite transmissions to the middle east. Let them return to message by camel.
I agree with this article. I'm very concerned that money we're pumping into "relief efforts" in Southeast Asia (for example after the tsunami) will come back to haunt us. Do you folks understand why the KSA and it's ilk were so cheap with regard to aid to Southeast Asia? The KSA knew the dhimmni would trip over themselves to give aid to the Muslims in Southeast Asia. By doing so, it would leave more money available to press on with the jihad. The boys in the Kingdom were saying: Let the Americans rebuild the madrassa. We'll supply the teachers and ...eventually...the guns and bombs to carry on the jihad.
Do You Know Where The Muslim Owned Businesses Are In Your Area? Are You Unknowingly Spending Money At Muslim Owned Businesses, And Having Your Money Used To Fund Terrorism?
The fact is, Muslims own many businesses in America. The money they earn here is sent back to their homeland. In most cases, the money is used to pay for food and shelter. But in other cases, the money is used to fund terrorism and terrorist acts against the United States of America and her allies.
Do you really want the money you spend daily used against you to fund terrorism? Wouldn't you feel better knowing that the hard-earned money you're spending on a daily basis isn't being used to fund terrorist efforts to kill you and your family?
Of course you would! But did you also know that the Muslims have been boycotting American Companies in favor of their own, Muslim owned companies for years? Did you know they're boycotting American companies not only in the Arab World but here in the U.S.? They are! Ironically, the same tool the Muslims created to help promote their own businesses can be used by you to find and boycott them!
Here's a link on how to find them in your area: http://www.ropma.net/islamic_finder.htm
That's what they are all about in the UK, benefits, health service, compensation, at least £300 per week housing benefits, free automobiles, free food, free education, free furnishings, sofas, refrigerators, dishwashers, TVs etc. That is what they are all about, draining us of money that would otherwise of gone to British taxpayers. The people who contribute to our economy through sweat and hard work cannot see a return because these people are sabotaging our economies at every level.
Excellent discourse Hugh, and indeed a solution.
Too bad it is not read at State and DoD. I see where Wolfowitz has just approved the U.S. military training and supply the muslim Army of Indonesia.
The same Wolfowtiz who eulogized Ayatollah al Hakim, comparing him to Abraham Lincoln.
The same neo con crew that oversaw and approved an Iraqi Interim Constitution (2 years ago), that made Iraq an Islamic Republic in fashion of Iran.
I think you will have a hard time selling this to George Bush and Dick Cheney who happen to be friends of the Saudi/bin Ladens and business partners with them as well.
ROPMA~ There is one such business in my wife's hometown- a Halal meat production plant.
It's sad but true. Every dollar sent for any kind of aid is a dollar saved by the mullahs and the imans to spread more propaganda, build more mosques, fund madrassaas, and send for the jihad.
If we really wanted to aid the PEOPLE of a Muslim nation, we would send them facts on why they should convert to secularism.
That's why I didn't send any money for the tsunami victims: I don't want to help build mosques, madrassas, etc.
Furthermore, if people in Muslim nations need money, why don't their "brothers" in Saudi Arabia send some?
I would like to coin a new phrase. Hopefully it's not already a quote by somebody great.
"It's easy to win an argument with a fool; the hard part is convincing the fool that he's lost."
That means you Gary.
I find it curious that, while I see it as reassuring when I find Muslims setting up businesses, working, paying tax, and being in other ways peaceful citizens, in my neighbourhood, I find it reassuring and a point in their favour; while some other contributors to this site seem to find it a point against them. Ah, those crafty Muslims! When they cannot bilk us for Welfare money, they open a shop and take our money! What is it that we are against, I would like to ask: jihad - tyranny - or anyone in our neighbourhood whose background is not the same as ours?
Robert Heinlein defined an honest politician as one who once bribed stayed bribed. The leaders of the pro jihad states are not honest politicians. We pay protection money and they still misbehave.
Of course it would be politically and economically difficult to instantly stop this aid instantly, but, it should be a medium term goal. After all, if you went to a bar and the people you bought drinks for hated and insulted you, you wouldn't keep buying them drinks would you?
I hope that GWB is serious when he hints that Americas relationship to foreign nations should not ignore the level of democracy present. This principal if applied would take aid money away from most islamic states without it having to be an 'anti islamic' policy per se, but a pro democracy one.
ps. Very interesting developments in Lebanon.
kj! You do have a sense of humor! :P Still wrong tho.
Hugh,
Although the plan to stop giving aid/trading with the Dar al-Islam is sound to help combat Islamic terrorism, it would have unpleasant consequences.
Current estimates are that Saudi Arabia has between 800 Billion to 1 Trillion dollars invested in the American economy, which is 7% of it's total value. You cannot argue that Saudi Arabia withdrawing this investment would have no effect on the American economy, and ultimately on the Standard of living of Americans in general (which they would likely do if the path that you are suggesting is taken). How would you propose then, to sell this to the American public (or in fact to George Bush and the Carlyle Group, whose profits would take a nosedive)?
Ultimately, it's a rocky path ahead for America and Europe, but it's the only one leading out of the mountains.
Finaly Hugh, you stated that 5-6 trillion dollars have been paid to the Middle Eastern OPEC states in the last 30 years, but you have stated this figure to be 50-60 trillion dollars on at least two other occasions on this website. Which figure is correct, as I can't find any confirmation of this on the websites that I have visited?
I have long argued for a separation from the islamic world of the kind that was put in place with the Warsaw Pact bloc. This brought the communist states to their knees. Isolation from the vibrant economies of the West, led not only to the fall of communism as an instrument of state but led to the collapse of Marxism as a philosophy in the East. Marxism now survives only in academic enclosures of the West, where they are funded by capitalism.
A similar separation can be put for muslim states. No exchanges of people except at the necessary level. Unable to export their rapidly expanding pupulations and also unable to extract Jizya, muslim nations will collapse, and so will islam with them.
If this is not politically possible, then at the least we should make an effort to make the West as inhospitable to the practice of islamic rituals. As an example, the muslim call to prayer, is an encroachment on the public square, and should be regarded as illegal.
The muslim slaughter of animals is clearly an affront to Western humane methods of dealing with animals.
A very hardline on forced marriages, honour killings etc.
Try and convert as many muslims away from islam.
The muslim community is under intense pressure. Any of these proposals if brought in, would lead to many muslims leaving the lands of the kaffir.
In the UK, there is spate of articles on islam in the MSM - The Telegraph, The Times and the Daily Mail. None of these are complimentary, in fact, are highly critical of islam. These days, hardly a day goes by when there is not a critical article on muslims or islam in the UK. For instance, The Times had a huge article on the problems the Dutch are facing.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2099-1488514_1,00.html
The Daily Mail has an article on the difficulties faced by apostates of islam in the UK. The Daily Mail does not pull punches.
Now something is happening in Britain that I do not understand. Sheikh Bakri is calling for muslims to leave Britain. I find this hard to credit if dhimmification of the UK is proceeding to plan. My guess is that Bakri is aware that muslims are leaving islam by the droves. These apostates are not able to broadcast their identity at the moment but Bakri is aware, as he is close to the islamic community, that the ummah in the UK is under seige, and its morale is likely to collapse at any moment.
Charles Krauthammer and Thomas Friedman have both written that the U.S. should impose a substantial tax on petroleum products.
Demand would be driven down, depressing oil prices and reducing OPEC revenues.
Yes, retail fuel prices would be higher -- more closely in line with other western countries -- but the money would stay at home where it's needed. Taxes paid by U.S. petroleum consumers would fund security and other programs -- or be used to lower other taxes.
Come on guys: Get out of those ridiculous Humvees and other assorted land yachts and start driving geopolitically sensible vehicles!
This may interest all
Officials tell Arab Bank to stop wire transfers
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=677&u=/usatoday/20050228/bs_usatoday/officialstellarabbanktostopwiretransfers&printer=1
When we continue aid to someone who insults or injures us, they believe that is because they have a right to that aid.
For most of us the only thing we buy from them of real economic consequence is gasoline.
But did you know that not all oil companies buy thier oil from the Arab world?
Every year the US oil companies must submitt a statement to the Dept. of Energy that tells how many barrels of oil they bought and who they bought it from.
I can only remember 2 companies from last years list.Shell oil,which was the largest importer of Saudi oil in the US last year.
The report showed British Petroleum as buying no oil from the Saudis.
JLP
Great article. We are making good progress in the military part of the war, beginning to see results in the political/ideological areas but must do much more in the economic phase of the war on Islamofascism.
The most important aspect of the economic war is reducing the price of oil. While it may be fun and important to talk about the big picture and what the government should do; but I believe it comes down to each of us to actually do something. Start now, yourself and reduce your use of oil. Get a low mileage car, drive less and use less energy whenever possible.
I bought a hybrid and I consider it my tank in the war on Islamofascism. I drive to work smiling that I am in my small way giving the finger to the oil sheiks.
When American troops pile into places like Somalia, Lebanon, Kuwait and Iraq in the name of human rights (sincere but misguided) this is also a form of aid.
Money is given to places like Jordan, Egypt and Pakistan, in order to have some influence in those countries. If it wasn't for American aid, such nations would have almost nothing to lose by not helping the USA.
Unfortunately America can't actually afford to do what it is doing. It has a huge budget deficit, which it covers by asking the rest of the world for finance. The USA is a good debtor nation, it makes its payments, but this is hardly a good state of affairs for the Christendom.
If the rest of the world were to say "no more" to the USA's vast and constant borrowing, the USA would be in for a very unfortunate five or ten years - but it would certainly recover. However there is no need for such an economic confrontation and upset - all the USA needs to do is just throw the Muzzie carrot and stick away.
When will the USA stop living beyond its means? When will they stop sucking money out of the financial institutions of Europe and Japan? This could easily be achieved by ceasing all foreign aid to Muslim countries, and this will not happen until the USA stops wanting to have political and military leverage in such Muslim countries. Military isolationism most come first.
All Muslims can not be expelled from the West, at least one million must remain, scattered through Christendom's main cities as a human shield. A government licence should be available in order to be a practicing Muslim. Licensed Muslims should register themselves at police stations in the same manner as sex offenders etc... Unlicensed Muslims should be subjected to prison or deportation.
I was talking to an Asian friend of mine who lived most of his life amongst Muslims. He explained that Muslims are never grateful for anything because they give all thanks to Allah. For example (according to my friend) if a Christian were to rescue a Muslim from a slow death in a desert, the Muslim would thank Allah for sending an otherwise worthless infidel to him to save his precious Muslim life. The Christian would only receive fleeting and superficial thanks. The same happens when a Muslim gets a visa to the West - he thanks Allah (not the Western country concerned) and then, to show gratitude to Allah, he or she will agitate for Islam. They have a completely alien system of values that we can't relate to.
The Western governments don't understand this at all, and still mistakenly believe that they can buy a Muslim's gratitude. America's troubles in Iraq are very good example of Muslim ingratitude.
Many Americans posting here ALWAYS have a go at 20th century Communism, which is quite strange due to its irrelevance to the debate. However if you all insist on raising this issue, please consider that militant Islam was only a problem in Russia AFTER 1991. Before 1991, the Soviet Union was not a total flop; it was a global superpower who led in many aspects of the space race. Communism was of course bloody and economically flawed, but it is a mistake to completely write off the entire 20th century Socialist experiment. Certain aspects of it seemed to function. The Viet Cong were an absolutely incredible military organization, who often ran rings around (often) stoned, syphilitic and demoralized American troops - who would usually resort to bombing empty jungle. Stalin's WWII industrial war machine, in terms of quality and quantity, compared more than favourably with that of the USA. Hence, we see that in wartime it is not insane to switch to Socialistic planning.
You are all right to scoff at Communism's economic performance and throw scorn at its many killing fields, but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. The Soviet Union's (and China's) expert handling of Muslim minorities must be worth some serious academic study, because it was (is) obviously superior to ours. For this reason US interference in the Soviet Union's suppression of Islamists in Afghanistan was probably one of the greatest blunders of the late 20th century.
I concur with the article heading and actually due dilligence on my purchase both personally and at work, I boycott french products and will not step foot inside a Target store.Lets get ready to rumble JWers and boycott muslim products.
Hugh,
Please let's have some figures, these would be very useful.
I am always hearing people say that the US gives massive aid to Israel and that is why it's so unpopular in the Arab world but from what I understand this is tiny compared to all the donations pouring into the pockets of countries like Suadi etc.
Last time i checked, i found out that the muslim countries got the most important resources on earth(they got everything in their countries). If they banned them, they are the one who are gonna loss everything because without us ,your trade market will go down and you will ride bicyles instead of our horses and camels and there will be war between your people.
without the middle east , your people will kill each other like animals(WW1 and WW2).
Weastern countries is not god.
god is protecting us regardless of what you think.
If you guys think that we need you, Think twice.Your people came to us and digged for it and gaved us money for oil.We used to live more happier than now.
We are trying to live good life but your butchers are trying to kill anybody for their own good(oil and power) and the cost is our people and our countries.
No one comes to the middle east and stayed in it as winner(ask your grandfathers where are their graves and don't let yours here).
We can depend on ourselves but can you.Think not
Welcome to gates of hell on you
Bagdad, Demascaus,Jordan,cairo and gulf people are waiting to see you dying on our front doors.
Zman:
Where would we be without your precious contribution?
I would love to milk my camel, whack the donkey, shag the goat and spank my monkey,
(as any proper ME- social riser can second)
Instead, I am sitting here on a computer trying to make sense of some complicated matters.
Then along comes Zman and cracks me up:
Zman claims to have a direct connection to God (correction: ALLAH)
-Allah and God are not the same thing- to me they are not-
Yesterday where was Allah's protecion for 125 young Iraq'is when a suicide bomber drove his car into them?
First I thought it was you, Zman!
Then I saw you post again here today, so I am surprised you are still with us! Let me know when you are ready!
It would be a good idea if all countries joined the boycott. Unfortunately, oil is one of the most fungible of commodities. It is sold into the market and resold many times. Our boycott of Saudi Arabia, for example, would have no effect on the economics of oil or Saudi Arabia’s wealth.
Nevertheless, I believe we should end all political and economic relations with Saudi Arabia (to pick the 1st and most important case). This is a moral imperative. We can’t continue to sanction the actions of the world’s leading jihadist power. It’s time we get some moral backbone. This is the first step. For our honor, our future, and our civilization, we need moral leadership.
Amicus,
Your economic data concerning Saudi investment in the USA is disputible-- and in my opinion false, and the result of scum-marxist-Moore and his collaborators. As is some other stated "truths" here.
And I see that old Soviet propaganda machine keeps chugging along through Timbo.
-**********************
According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, total foreign investment in the United States in 2003 was $10,515 billion dollars. This means that even if the figure that Unger "heard" about Saudis having $860 billion is correct, then the Saudis would only have about 8 percent of total foreign investment in the United States. Unless you believe that almost all American assets are owned by foreigners, then it cannot possibly be true that Saudis "own seven percent of America."
http://www.davekopel.com/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-in-Fahrenheit-911.htm
JasonP,
I agree with you on principle, but unfortunately strategic issues concerning Russia and China currently limit our options.
And Mr. Timbo gushes praise on the Viet-Cong-- the murderous butchers whose tactics and strategy Zarqawi is trying to copy. Terrorism-- murdering non-combatants, and destroying infrastructure necessary for society to function was the main weapon of the Viet-Cong.
They got their asses kicked, the people rejected them, and were destroyed by the USA and South-Vietnamese forces shortly after Tet 1968. They did not win. The USA never lost a battle.
The North won the war years after we abandoned the South because the communist sympathizing Congress cut off all aid.
Kentim,
To clarify the economic data that we are discussing:
1. I agree that the figure in my previous post should have read "foreign investment" and not total investment. I apologise for this oversight.
2. At no point did I state that Saudi Arabia "owns seven percent of America". There is a difference between having money invested and actually owning land, natural resources etc. Saudi Arabia could withdraw their investment from America but never claim any land in recompense, for example.
3. I did not state that "almost all American assets are owned by foreigners". That is clearly false.
Finally, thank you for the link concerning Farenheit 9-11. I was aware of some factual innacurracies in the documentary, but not that many.
Okay,Amicus, sorry for not being more clear about that post-- the bottom part was cut/paste from the site I linked to. I should have put quote marks and title first.
I did'nt think you thought all those other things, my main focus was your #1 response above.
Check Moores history-- hes a quasi-marxist scum who's profiting from the deaths of Americans and damage to America. With help. Chomskys another one. They're parasites.
Observation
There are many-spoiled American’s out there, & they do not truly understand the complex strategy & vision of American international policy in an ever evolving & dynamic world. Strategists must always take the whole world into account, i.e., the economics, political struggles, availability of resources etc, of all the other nations on a given day in the life of our America. Most Americans, I bet, expect a good economy to find a career or run a business, expects cheap gas when he fills up the car, expects fresh & abundant variety of groceries from around the world at the supermarket, etc, & don’t tell me we do not expect these things, since all the financial figures show, yes, Americans do very much indeed expect to have what we have available to us every day. Yes, American visionaries did plan to see some kind of evolving spread democracy in the Middle East as a result of Afghanistan & Iraq, & America will not fall on her face, just because of all the anti-war professors. A great witness from our past looks now to all of us to keep this nation free, strong, prosperous, & most definitely free from the will of Islam.