Fitzgerald: Paying to prevent an increase in terrorism

In other words, we must -- forever, apparently -- guarantee that Muslims around the world and especially in the West are kept prosperous. This will be a tall order. Infidels generally limit their family size, while Muslims deliberately have huge families, and Muslim leaders (Khaddafy, Boumedienne, many others) speak openly about outbreeding Infidels in Europe and thus, slowly and inexorably, inheriting that continent. Polygamy, where practiced, even in Infidel lands where it is officially illegal, leads to still larger families. Muslims discourage education for women, and they certainly also discourage most kinds of work outside the home for women, even while regarding them as breeding machines.

Muslims are also discouraged from free and skeptical inquiry, which not only science, but a certain kind of entrepreneurial activity relies upon – that is, the spirit of doing things in a novel way. The work-ethic, or lack of it, can be seen in visits to coffeehouses in Arab cities, Cairo or Damascus or Baghdad, where men idle away the day with hubble-bubble pipes, or watching television, or playing Arab board-games. In the oil-rich Muslim lands, they idle away the time differently, but idle it away they do, while foreign, chiefly Infidel, workers, keep things humming. Inshallah-fatalism helps to explain the comparatively poor economic performance of Muslim states, and of Muslims compared to Infidels in Infidel states.

Why then should it be the responsibility of Infidels to ignore this explanation for the failure of some Muslims to be prosperous (those who have the oil money to keep them afloat, as so many rich Arabs in the West do, are another story), and to think that it is the duty of Infidels to keep those Muslims prosperous, yesterday, today, tomorrow, forever? It makes no sense.

But if it were to be believed that the only way to keep Muslims from becoming dangerous is to ensure their prosperity, then another tack suggests itself. Why endure a Muslim presence in the West at all, if the only way those Muslims can remain here safely is if we, the Infidels, guarantee that they will be prosperous, for we will see to it by transferring our wealth or by hiring those who on merit alone would not deserve it? There is no need. The argument that Muslims will turn violent when the economy turns down -- the economy will always turn down -- is not an argument in favor of permanent Infidel support for Muslims, but for ending Muslim immigration, and reversing the current demographic trends by making the gradual imposition of Islamic practices and laws more, rather than less, difficult, all over the lands of the Infidel West.

That is the conclusion to be reached. But that is not what those who wrote this "government document" have dared to let themselves conclude.

So we've done it for them.