Another encouraging article from Canada, specifically on the failures of multiculturalism:

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=ae3d7f10-d710-4aa3-9a52-2358d444dfbf&k=26138

Posted by: amana39 at June 13, 2006 10:01 PM

Conrad Black a ver pro conservative person, had begun this paper along with several others, such as the Windsor Star. Their articles were so different than the other papers l had read before, ie Globe and Mail, and other liberal rags, that it really peaked my interest, and got me on the right track.
l am not surprrised by this article coming from the National Post. Good for them!

Posted by: Lulu at June 13, 2006 10:12 PM

Nice work from Gordon Nickel (PhD). When I read this before seeing Nickel's qualifications (p. 4), I was thinking that this is a journalist who has done his homework. I also commend the National Post which has not shied away from giving a frank presentation of Islam (National Post did publish the Mohammad cartoons--one of only a handful of Canadian publications to have done so).

Posted by: Archimedes at June 13, 2006 10:46 PM

Info on the author, Gordon Nickel:

Alliance University College
Assistant Professor of Intercultural Studies, Director of Master of Arts in Cross-Cultural Ministries Program

Education:

* B.A., University of Saskatchewan
* M.A., Mennonite Brethren Biblical Seminary
* M.A., School of Oriental and African Studies, London
* Ph.D., University of Calgary

Gordon served as a missionary among Muslims in Pakistan and India between 1988 and 2003. His academic research is in the earliest commentaries on the Qur'an. He has taught at St. Thomas Theological College in Karachi, Centenary MB Bible College near Hyderabad, India, and Bethany Bible Insitute. He joined the faculty of Canadian Theological Seminary at ACTS in 2003. Gordon's desire is to help prepare and mentor a new generation of cross-cultural ministers in this exciting era of "World Christianity." He is the author of "Peaceable Witness Among Muslims" (Herald Press, 1999).

Posted by: Hulegu Khan at June 13, 2006 10:49 PM

Well, that didn't take long.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,199363,00.html

Posted by: Carolyn2 at June 13, 2006 10:50 PM

Also, more good news, from our friends at CAIR, that Bush has added an aid who can see the picture and is not afraid to say what's on his mind.

http://www.cair-net.org/default.asp?Page=articleView&id=39908&theType=NB

Posted by: Briars at June 13, 2006 10:53 PM

"This is all a test (from God), we accept this," he said, adding that Bashir's wife has prepared his favorite goat curry dish to welcome him.
-- from the article linked to Fox above.

It's good to know that Bashir's wife has prepared his favorite goat curry dish to welcome him home. More A.P. B.S.

Posted by: alexon at June 13, 2006 11:02 PM

Very informative piece by Mr. Nickel.

If only we could get some like this in the mainstream American press.

Posted by: alexon at June 13, 2006 11:05 PM

I can see that you have put a lot of effort and thought into this blog, in an attempt to help stem the onslaught of Islam.

However, it occurs to me that this method of trying to check the menace of Islam is akin to trying to cure smallpox by cleaning up the thousands of individual puss spots on the body of an infected person. In other words, you are just treating the symptoms of the disease, not the disease itself. One has to tackle the causal factors, the virus itself!

In a harsher world, as with cases of the Asian Flu virus, whole populations of poultry have been were slaughtered (a popular Muslim word!) to prevent the infection from spreading to other populations.

Such a "root and branch" method has not been, and cannot be, applied to infected humans. In any case, it is not something that can be condoned since we are talking of about 1.2 billion persons infected with this Islamic virus!

Taking a purely medical approach, it is necessary to see how the infection presents itself. A close examination of the patients show that:

1. they are born into a closed, almost incestuous, society.
   
   
2. they learn the concepts of Islam from a very early age and their sense of right and wrong is shaped by the closed society they live in.
   
   
3. by the time they reach puberty, it has become their way of life, something they take for granted, something they do not question. Or even dare to question since, by this time, they have also learnt that to question anything about their religion takes them into the dangerous well-charted waters of apostasy.
   
   
4. when they attend their ritual Friday prayers, these concepts and value-systems are reinforced, forcefully and regularly, by imams or prayer leaders at their mosques.
   
   
5. they have completely integrated the 'them" and "us" mindset, an entrenched point of view that they refuse to even question.
   
   
6. even in the adult state, they remain within their closed society, restricting interactions with non-islamic non-infected persons only on a needs must basis.

The root of the infection is their unshakable and deeply entrenched belief that the Koran is a perfect document (a very palpable untruth), and their faith that Mohammed, their Prophet (though, judging by his behaviour, Profiteer might have be a more appropriate word), was a true messenger of the god.

There is no simple or short-term remedy. To contain this exceedingly virulent virus, to make its progress untenable, we need to examine these factors and systematically dismantle the pillars of Islam.

In terms of history, there is ample evidence to substantiate the presence of Israel, and the chronology of the Jewish and Christian faiths. There is, however, very little archaeological evidence to sustain the presence of Mohammed, that 7th Century pillar of Islam.

I might be mistaken, but the first reference appears to have surfaced only in the 9th or 10th Century! Exactly how much support did he have in earlier times? Was belief in him resurrected to sustain evolving political needs of a later period?

Similarly, despite much evidence of existing trade routes in that region during, and before, that period, there is little or no reference to Mecca as a vital trade centre. Further, the etymology of the word "ka'aba" seems to suggest that such a pilgrimage centre did not exist ONLY in Mecca. that many other such centres existed throughout the region to serve other non-muslim populations.

There is also the very strange anomalies found in the ruins of the very earliest mosques. Their prayer directions seemed to aim not at Meca but at Jerusalem!

The imbecilic argument that the Koran is imutable because it was written by god needs to be demolished. Its inaccuracies and deficiencies must be highlighted, and the miserable knowledge-base of such a god be brought into scorn.

It can be further demolished by a detailed look at the following:

1. Mohammed, and all his followers, were, for the most part illiterate
   
   
2. the passages from the Koran were passed on as an oral tradition, which, probably, gave rise to the current interest in having people memorise the entire Koran
   
   
3. not all the passages in the Koran, in its entirety, were known to all of Mohammed's followers
   
   
4. at times, even Mohammed seemed uncertain of his memory of certain passages
   
   
5. some of these passages were written down in the local language, not in Arabic
   
   
6. the evolution of the Arabic script during the critical 7th Century period when the Koran was first "written" and when it was finally codified, sometime in the 10th Century
   
   
7. several versions of the Koran existed until it was decided that only one should be kept, and the rest were destroyed
   
   
8. the earliest extant version of the Koran manuscript, found in the Yemen, should be closely examined archaeologists and language scholars to help get a fix on the Koran as it was, and what it has become today.

The patient does not require just medication. Radical deep surgery is called for!

Posted by: aviceda at June 13, 2006 11:07 PM

aviceda,

Surgery is most always voluntary. How do we get Muslims to volunteer themselves to reform/convert?

Posted by: deesine at June 13, 2006 11:23 PM

Just a suggestion, but I recommend saving this article as a text file of some kind (e.g. Word). National Post articles have a way of disappearing from the web after a short time.

Posted by: johnb at June 13, 2006 11:40 PM

deesine,

The patient, in this case, is Islam itself, not the individual Muslims.

By exposing its weaknesses, it might be possible to weaken its hold on its advocates. Possibly even stop new recruits into their ranks. One hopes!!!

Posted by: aviceda at June 13, 2006 11:42 PM

The root of the infection is their unshakable and deeply entrenched belief that the Koran is a perfect document

This is where I differ from the mainstream anti-jihad thinking. Ultimately, the cause of their behavior is not that they revere the koran as something divine. It is that they have no conscience for brutality, and that whatever they feel is right, must be forced on others.

Put it this way, let's say that I, myself, believed that the koran was indeed the word of God. Let's say that God told me so Himself. Still, I would not follow the koran. I would reject this God. Why? Because my conscience can not allow me to worship an evil entity, no matter how powerful. And a big part of islamic culture is evil. The way they treat each other, and the rest of the world, is evil to the core because it is based on ideology and not the golden rule.

No holy book can ever be a substitute for a conscience. God gives us a conscience. It is man that gives us holy books. So never let a holy book supercede what a normal, functioning conscience should tell you. Yet, muslims do. As a Christian, I have a holy book. But I also have a conscience and a moral sense of right and wrong. Should the two collide, my conscience prevails. Not by policy. By instinct. For muslims, it is reversed. That's the problem.

So, really, whether the koran is truly the word of God, or just the rantings of a madman, matters not to one who has a conscience. But muslims lack such compassion. Therefore, what they believe to be true or false is irrelevant. Either way, they assume licence to brutualize the world. Why? Because that is the way they are. And they were like that long before Islam came to town.

That, therefore, is the root of the problem. Not the Koran, but the people who produced it and follow it. The culture is the problem. Case in point, before Islam, the arabs had a 40-year war over the "honor" of a camel. That type of warlike stupidity is what we see today. And the koran did not exist at that time. But the arabic culture existed. That is the common denominator. Not the koran - as the historical timeline shows. The koran is just the latest manifestation of that cultural debauchery.

Of course, it is bad enough, in our PC world, to fault a religion. It is even more verbotten to fault a culture that is much older than the religion - regardless of how obviously at fault it is. It is one thing to quote passages in their holy book and say, 'Ah here's the problem'. Much more difficult to come right out and say, 'Ah, the people are the problem - that's why they have such a book in the first place.'

Posted by: somethingaboutislam at June 13, 2006 11:44 PM

VS Naipul has aleays argued that Islam is simply a codification in religious terms of Arab desert culture, and that it is by its nature imperialistic. One of the many examples he cited, and it stuck in my mind because it's so mundane and subtle, was that in Pakistan (I think) the most common fruit is the date, not because it grows well there or is superior to other foods available in taht country, but because it integral to Arab culture and Arab culture is integral to Islam that it simply displaced other foods.

A quick search dug up this from the New York Review of Books, but I'm certain there's more.

Posted by: mckreck at June 14, 2006 12:02 AM

"VS Naipul has aleays argued that Islam is simply a codification in religious terms of Arab desert culture, and that it is by its nature imperialistic."
-- from a posting above

That Islam is the "Arab national religion," that it promotes the supremacy -- linguistic, cultural, and political -- of the Arabs, is a point made not only by V. S. Naipaul, but by many ex-Muslims, including Anwar Shaikh ("Islam--the Arab Religion"), Ibn Warraq, Ali Sina, and others some of whom appear at various websites including www.faithfreedom.org.

Since 80% of the world's Muslims are non-Arabs, one way of weaning some of them away from Islam is to point out, again and again, all the ways in which Arabs treat non-Arab Muslims with disdain, or persecute or even murder them. The Kurds know this. The Berbers in Algeria, who had to riot in Tizi-Ouzou to finally force the Arabs to allow the Berbers to use their own language and to preserve their own culture, know this. A few writers in Malaysia have made this point. It is a point that Infidels, in talking to Muslims, or in writing for audiences that may include Muslims, should stress.

Posted by: Hugh at June 14, 2006 12:13 AM

"I thank Allah that I am free today," a smiling and waving Bashir said after emerging from a scrum of about 150 supporters and journalists waiting outside the gates of Jakarta's Cipinang prison.
"I call on all Muslims to unite behind one goal, that is the implementation of Sharia law."
+++++++++++++++++++++++++

islamic leadership regardless of what is professed wants sharia law across the globe.

Prepare, be armed be ready.

The Texican,
Freedom, the only choice at any cost and the cost will be immense.

Posted by: Texican at June 14, 2006 12:14 AM

somethingaboutislam,

I see what you are saying about the culture/people that created Islam, but it seems to be a distinction without a difference insofar as the problem we face today. For it is the exportation/imposition of the religion of Islam to/over conquered peoples (with very different cultural norms) which causes many of them to similarly radicalize.

Indonesians, for example, do not adopt Arab cultural ways, they adopt Islam. And Islam in turn contains within it the intolerance for others and supremacy of itself which creates neo-radicals in the new host population which then leads to such crimes against humanity as seen in the Bali bombings. Those were Indonesians doing that, not Arabs, but the common denominator of course is Islam.

Posted by: alexon at June 14, 2006 12:14 AM

Bieng informed about islam and doing something about islam are far divided, but any start is better than where Canada was.

Posted by: Texican at June 14, 2006 12:24 AM

Sadly, I believe more thoughtful constructs are doomed to fail, or doomed to take so long that other exigencies will prevail. It must eventually boil down to something like the following formula for most persons to effectively fight off this flaming catastrophe: Islam = disease. Muslim = vector. What is done beyond that will be the most difficult thing to manage. We don't want to lose our souls. But Muslims seem to be literally hell bent on ripping them from us one way or the other. Grim.

Posted by: jsla at June 14, 2006 12:38 AM

Hugh,

In view of what you say, one would think that the Persians of present day Iran would seek to cast off the Arab yoke, including Islam itself, which has oppressed them for so many centuries.

Surely they must know that Islam was imposed on them through force by conquering Arab armies. Why then do they not rebel and reclaim their true identity? Not only do they not rebel but they seem even more radical than their Arab contemporaries. From Ayatollah Khomeini to democratically elected President Ahmadin-jihad, the trend over the last quarter century is not exactly encouraging.

Posted by: alexon at June 14, 2006 12:41 AM

Perhaps an important point to note is that the Koran does not contain the correct teaching to prevent violence. In other words, the Koran is all about power in this world, otherwise Muslim leaders would not be so concerned about fulfilling dominance or hearing criticism. Compared to other belief systems throughout history, Islam has been the violent aggressor by a factor of 1000 to 1.

Posted by: Report at June 14, 2006 12:44 AM

I did not know that qatl' (it is pronounced thus by the koran reading variety) word was around then.
qatl' = murder, to kill (verb).
qatil = murderer, killer, perpetrator.
qatilana = murderous.

This language has some very harsh sounding words. The meaning is harsh too. I think it must be arabic, or Farsi, since urdu has lots of arabic and farsi words and came around only 400 years or so back. This word is older.

Posted by: arjun.sevak at June 14, 2006 1:10 AM

"Why then do they not rebel and reclaim their true identity? Not only do they not rebel but they seem even more radical than their Arab contemporaries."
-- from a posting above

But many Iranians are quick to tell any foreigner who will listen that they are "not Arabs" and that they "despise Arabs." (This is also a statement a Westerner is likely to hear in Turkey). During the Pahlavi two-shah dynasty, attempts were made to resurrect, and emphasize, the pre-Islamic past -- remember Reza Pahlevi's big party at Persepolis, with all those European guests, and the food from Fauchon or Hediard, and some sort of Peter-Brookish spectacle, and it was passing brave to be a Shah, and ride in triumph through Persepolis?

Who can rebel now in Iran? But at least some of those who find solace in the Persian past, including the poet Firdowsi, whose "Shahnameh" is widely believed (I have no idea if it is true) to have kept the Persian language alive and potent, and prevented the arabization that elsewhere naturally accompanied islamization.

If I were an Iranian in exile, I would make a final break with Islam. I would no longer be content to tell the world that I was a "good Muslim" or to tell Infidel friends that while I was "a Muslim" I really didn't "
take it seriously." No, I'd go the whole way -- for the sake of my children, whom I would wish to make a clean break with me. But since I would have grown up in a world where one was expected to have some kind of identity, I think I'd take up, or at least claim to be, a Zoroastrian, without knowing a thing about it other than that Zubin Mehta is a Parsi from Mumbai, where other Parsis (Zoroastrian exiles from islamized Persia) live. It wouldn't matter.

I think you confuse the rulers in Iran with everyone else. The ruling class in Iran is certainly plus islamiste que les islamistes. But what would you expect? After all, if you are a Shi'a, one way of proving yourself to the contemptuous Sunnis -- if you choose not to fight them -- is to show that you are even more militant in your anti-Infidel (anti-American, anti-Israel) attitudes and willingness to express them and act upon them. where it was passing braMost Muslims have not had the nature of Islam constantly pushed to the front of their consciousness.

An appeal can be made to Persian resentment of the Arabs, and such an appeal can help to diminish the diminishing appeal of Islam itself. Iranian radio stations in Los Angeles could help. So could the American government, if stupidity, timidity, and cupidity -- the esdrujula explanation -- did not hamper its efforts. It can be pointed out to an Iranian audience that the "gift" of the Arabs, Islam, brought with it arabization, and that gift had been rejected by Firdowsi and other Persian poets. Iranians could be reminded that the last hideous quarter-century of Islamic rule was another "gift" of the Arabs, for the aid given Khomeini by Arafat and the PLO was important to his success. Perhaps Zoroastrianism can come back into fashion, for those Iranians who wish to give up Islam altogether, but need to assume some kind of identity, as so many in the Middle East apparently feel such a need.

All sorts of things can be encouraged by intelligent Infidels and their governments. But they need to understand the origins, scope, and full menace of Islam to themselves, before they will be ready to proceed as necessary.

Posted by: Hugh at June 14, 2006 1:20 AM

It's midnight in my complex and I'm standing up and clapping..........

If I ever had the opportunity, I'd like to buy Mr.Nickel a beer. Not a Canadian one that he might be use to, but a real beer...probably a Guiness.

I'm impressed to say the least with the article and with the background of Mr. Nickel. But then again my opinion and a dollar might get you a cup of coffee.

Patriot_1/17

Know the Enemy. Know Yourself.

Posted by: Patriot_1/17 at June 14, 2006 1:22 AM

Robert,

Thanks for publishing the article from the "The National Post" in Canada. The writer of this article has a lot of God-given courage to speak the truth in the writen form. Just did a saved in a Word document verson of the article as backup from the internet article. This while getting up in the middle of the night. Please do keep up the good work in what you do in getting the truth out. God Bless.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 14, 2006 1:53 AM

Multiculturalism has never worked in Canada nor anywhere else in the world. If you think that's a racist statment, just ask any tribe in Africa if they wouldn't mind merging with another tribe or two on their continent. They're all black, but they are all from different tribes and each wanting to keep its own specific characteristics.

Let's turn to Canada now. Most politicians and pseudo-social/cultural "experts" fail to understand the 'homogenuous unit principle".

The more differences two people have with one another, the greater the task and effort there is to assimilate. There is no argument there.

As a white, European background, teenager growing up in Toronto, we were always being made to feel ashamed of our colour and our racial background, in order to elevate the cultural groups which began to invade Canada back in the mid-70's.

My wife worked for a large bank and was never hired on permanently, however, people were hired from other countries who could neither speak, write or understand English, however they simply went to Human Resources and threatened discrimination and bingo, they were made full-time employees.

It is reasons like these why many Canadians began to move out of Toronto into Durham Region and even beyond, because they were tired of the BS which continued to parade itself as tolerant and multicultural.

Why should it surprise anyone that now with Islam pushing its way through into Canada, think it strange that now Canadians have to wrestle with yet not just another culture but an ideology which is opposed to humanity and even the former Christian values which Canada once had?

Canada is now going to make way for Islam, when it literally kicked Christianity out the doors in the name of secularism. Talk about a double standard.

Good Luck, 'cause I have no answers.

PJ

Posted by: PJ at June 14, 2006 5:45 AM

l have two questions, one was a point that governments and individuals try to convey to non-Arabs muslims that they are being treated unfairly by the Aram muslim. can you also say that they might want to go the other extreme, in that they will be more Muslim, more violent to prove they good muslims? Those converts especially the ones that are caucasion, might they want to prove to their arab muslims brothers,that they are good muslims by being more extreme?
and my 2nd question, l have a brother who is an athiest (says he is,) and says all reglions are bad, just that islam is worse, and wants to attack islamist with more like in Europe, forbidding burqas, crosses, etc. He cannot understand it when l tell him the Koran is most violent in comparison to Christainity,Hindu etc. this is common with non-religious persons,they seem to lump all relgions good and bad together..

Posted by: Lulu at June 14, 2006 6:12 AM

To continue the probing of the relationship as mentioned in the Canadian National Post between Muslims and violence, I decided to reflect on some key aspects of the Muslim spiritual culture.

Let us consider the Muslim/Koran relationship as a nature/nurture dichotomy.
The Muslim human is conceived and born into a cultural milieu, now well established with a definite historical dimension. He/she is nurtured according to his family's adherence to the Koranic tradition and its derived scriptural teachings. The types of spiritual elements and influences contained in the Mohammedan Arabic-based language, sounds, meanings and traditions are passed directly into the growing Muslim child's mind, spirit and body. He/she is primarily the resultant fruit of those elements, just as a plant contains the elements of the soil that bears it.

We observers and commentators on Islamic cultures note that their sources are replete with words, concepts and practices which are far below the standards expected of modern Civil Society. From an early age budding Muslim children are absorbing the values enshrined in such Koranic concepts as "Taqiyya, shirk, jihad, darura, fatwa, hijab, qatl', etc, etc." , with the resultant behaviors, habits and patterned responses to self and others. Many of their teachers inject elements of hostility, futility, fatalism and hatred into these sensitive children's minds. Then there are the examples from their everyday feudalized surroundings to reinforce the concepts.

Since the Sixth Century Koranic world view and the embedded aspects of its harsh desert survival precursor are preserved and passed on as as "ABSOLUTES", the growing Muslim child has his/her being compressed by familial and tribal pressures into the deterministic cultural mold created by blind adherence to Mohammed and Allah. The surrounding family, tribe and cultural milieu are so steeped in this predeterminism and fatalism that the social outcome is reinforced and predictable for each child.That is why Mohammedan societies appear so static and stagnant to other advanced human cultures.

Mohammed's environment was a pre-Old Testament world set below the benefits of the Mosaic moral code of the Ten Commandments. Mohammed was only able to see the primitive desert tribal struggle for dominance, honor and existence. He was unable to unite with the higher standards of the Christian and Jewish cultures nearby. Instead he sought to manipulate their people, systems and ideas for his personal advantage.

Parasitically, Mohammed took elements of Christian, Jewish and Animist teachings and subverted their original contents to match his view on things. In addition he was possessed by an unusual relationship with a spiritual being he called "Jibril" and another entity he called "Allah". The nature of these relationships warrants a close examination some other time. Suffice to comment that the spiritual struggles with "Jibril" and "Allah" further destabilized Mohammed's uneven character but gave him an charismatic edge over his fellow Arabs.

The rapid elevation of this tribal warrior chief with his mystical visions and poetic manners into a paragon of virtue by his followers, systematized whatever fragments of goodness, bad, evil, confusion, poetry, bloody-mindedness,violence, manipulativeness, patriachy, sexual abuse etc., etc., that he embodied. By declaring him as the Perfect Man the process of routinization was established by the early followers. A new tradition was launched into Arab history and began its assault on the rest of humanity.

The corrosive cumulative effects of such pre-Old Testament doctrines on the souls of men, women, boys, girls and their physical and spiritual environment became evident very early in the development of Islamic culture. The Mohammedan anti-humanity, fantastical notions became enshrined as Absolutes and were physically enforced as standards of judgement. The permitted militaristic scourging of foreign groups and generalized hatred of "outsiders" gave an outlet for the thwarted and deflected psychic energies of those unfortunate enough to be born into this distorted cultural system. The Sharia law system maintained the repressive, bloody and vindictive nature of Mohammedan thought under the guise of social control.

When we objectively examine the character of the founder of Islam and the elements of his times that he selected and embodied into his world-view, we can discover the essential truth about Islam. Mohammedanism's absolutist claims as a personal and public worldview for all people and all times, render its followers incapable of ever reforming its substance and alienate them into the judges and enemies of the rest of humanity. Moslems are further incapable of recognizing the higher Truths and deeper insights of Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism and even Hinduism, each of which they regard as inferior.

As the twig is bent, so the tree is inclined. This dictum applies to Mohammed as the founder, the cult that follows his traditions and the impact made on each new child born into this self-limiting spiritual cage. The tragedy is that inside each Moslem resides an original and natural character of a human being, repressed and prevented from flowering by the poisoned cultural earth of its nurture.

For now, the West has to re-discover why the Christian Church was forced to deal in the Middle Ages so directly and physically with the Moslem incursions into its domains. We also have to re-discover the spiritual, intellectual and ideological weapons needed to defeat this challenge to our advanced world cultures.Then we must employ those weapons to repulse this invasion of our public and private spaces.

There will be many tactics necessary to advance our civilisation's claims over the Mohammedan challenge and demands for our submission. I offer a few a suggestions:

Exacerbate the fratricidal struggles between Islam's factions; Publicly exposing the great faultlines of doubt that reside in Koranic teachings about God, human relationships, life's purpose, science, history etc; Unleashing the destructive forces held in check within our society at present by law and custom- the rough youth elements; Encouraging dissent and desertion of Islam by its adherents into advanced, safer cultural nooks; Moving our economies from their dependence on Middle eastern oil; Propogating a thorough Critique and Counterproposal to Koranic teachings and propagate this through all media channels ; Protect and support outspoken Moslems who desire to join our Civil Societies on mutually beneficial terms: Sanctions against Mohammedan economic, cultural, legal and social practices; Use of military force based on the lessons and successes of the Crusades, the British Empire and recent potent insights into the enemy's mind; etc.

I hope that this mini-essay offers some useful insight into the great struggle of our times. The means to stimulate change and set events in train are well known to us Westerners, and could be discussed at another time. Thanks Robert and Hugh for developing this forum.

Posted by: crusaderchristopher at June 14, 2006 6:30 AM

Gordon Nicke is truly a profile in courage because he as a westerner is going public what western leaders and ( old and new ) news media people were only able in the last five in a much more quiet way tell the truth about Islam.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 14, 2006 7:46 AM

americaningernamy,
You asked me on another thread where I was from. India.
What you call as 'multiculturism', we in India call as 'negation'. The school syllabus always denounced the Hindu religion. muslim invasion of India continued for 1200 years, and these barbar invaders who slaughtered hundreds of millions, are described in our school books as 'peaceful rulers'. The history before the birth of islam is dealt with as concisely as possible. The output is that a child is constantly confused about it, since everything about him, and books outside syllabus, indicates the opposite, indicates that muslims were aggressors who carved out afgha., pak. and bangladesh from Hindu India. I was 21 when I started on my personal voyage to Hinduism, when I dug out the history books that carried the REAL picture.

Posted by: arjun.sevak at June 14, 2006 7:52 AM

crusaderchristopher,
Nice job. I agree with you completely. Even if one government institute started carrying Mr. Spencer's anylases, and communicating through the mass media, watch pandemonium break loose throughout the world. It would be messy at first, but I think that your approach is one of the best that I have ever come across. All the other approaches require a considerable collateral damage. This approach will put the ummah on the defensive, and we might see lots of apostates reaching out to us, if they saw that the people are really beginning to get the hang of islam.
It was just an hour back when I was thinking that muslims can be compared with aliens, too. They are out to destroy Civilization. They want to destroy and mutilate all the signs of the great civilzations that have flourished and are flourishing. They have succeded due to their ruthlessness, time we paid back in spades.

Posted by: arjun.sevak at June 14, 2006 7:59 AM

Alexon:

I know a secular Persian man here in Toronto whose family fled the Islamic Revolution. Before the revolution, he was the manager of the largest museum in the country. His opinion was that the Islamic conquest was the worst thing that happened to his country's culture. I can't say that his is a majority opinion, but I don't think he's entirely alone, either. The leading voices against instituting Sharia courts in Ontario to "mediate" family and property disputes was an organization of Persian women. (I call them Persian deliberately, and not Iranian, as that is the name adopted by the last Shah's father, at Hitler's encouragement, to suggest an "Aryan" connection.)

Posted by: waterdragon52 at June 14, 2006 8:22 AM

Waterdragon, I get the same impression. The last Shah promoted teaching the high cultural acheivments of pre-Islamic Persia. This pride is re-emerging from the confusions and disapointments of post-revolutionary nationalism, and there's increasing awareness both in Iran and the West of Persia's past glories... and what has been lost to Islam. A freind tells me that on a recent visit worshipers began to leave the mosque immediately after the kuhtba while blessings to the ayatollahs were still being read out - something that wouldn't have happened a few years ago and indicative of a disillusionment with the ulema, if not waning piety. Which is not to sound overly optimistic; but the insular circle of Islam can only be broken from within, and then only by those with a personal stake in its history and evolution - ie. not by white Europeans. But I feel there's no hope for a new revolution or renaisance of true Persian culture before their Mahdi mythology has played itself out - or not.

americaningermany - it's been said before, Tim Burton's "Mars Attacks!" is a wicked metaphor of invasion and appeasment politics.

Posted by: Animus at June 14, 2006 11:13 AM

americaningermany,
muslims have that much influence because of our leadership's denial of the massacre of a million Hindus during the creation of pakistan in 1947. They go all the way to hide it. And hence have to bend backwards all the way to 1200 years proving that muslims were 'peaceful'. Also, you understand with 13% votes out there, what politician won't bend over ? Dhimmis, all.

The 1200 years have not been easy on us. Just in case you are interested, this is just a broad overview.

www.voi.org/books/negaind/ch2.htm

You need not read it all. Just the article 2.1. It is almost at the top.

"I don't. Even one mosque is too many
Agree with you fully.

Posted by: arjun.sevak at June 14, 2006 11:55 AM

Hugh

I agree with your assessment of Iran that Iran is a good target for de-Islamification, given their rich pre-Islamic past. Near the place I work, there is an Iranian Church, so it seems that many of the Iranians in the US are Christianizing. In the Iranian grocery in the area, the meat still tends to be halal - is that a cultural requirement? I don't know about Zoroastrians having that requirement.

Although Farsi survived the Arab conquests, its script became Arabic. This Arabization of language scripts has been a feature of the Islamization of various countries - Turkish, Pushtu, Dari, Urdu and other Turkic languages in Turan had it, and I believe that in Pakistan, local languages, like Sindi, Punjabi, Balochi use Arabic script as well. One Bangladeshi Hindu friend I have once told me (during a discussion about whether the liberation of Bangladesh was a good thing or not given that Islam wasn't defanged there) that had Bangladesh not been liberated, Bengali in that country would have started using the Arabic script.

While I can see how neighbors of the Arabs - Kurds, Berbers, Black Africans in Sudan - might rebel against Islam, how do you suggest that it be done elsewhere? For instance, the Afghans don't have a pre-Islamic identity - prior to the Saminid empire in Khorasan and the Ghaznavid empire, they were always a part of Persia (Zarathustra was born and brought up in Balkh, not Persia, but is never identified as an Afghan) or India (Gandhara, headquartered in Taxila, in modern day Rawalpindi). The same is true about Turks as well - they weren't Mongols. Given all that, how could they be encouraged to apostatize?

Posted by: Infidel Pride at June 14, 2006 12:29 PM

americaningermany writes: "I would also say that Persians are not like a lot of other Muslims."

A Gallup poll taken only a few months after 9-11, surveying attitudes of the Muslim world toward America, found that Iranians had among the least favorable opinions of America (along with the Pakistanis):

"Residents of Lebanon had the highest favorable opinion of the United States, at 41 percent, followed by NATO ally Turkey with 40 percent. The lowest numbers came from Pakistan, at 5 percent. 28 percent of Kuwaitis, 27 percent of Indonesians, 22 percent of Jordanians, 22 percent of Moroccans, 16 percent of Saudi Arabians and 14 percent of Iranians surveyed had a favorable view of the United States."

http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/02/26/gallup.muslims/

Obviously the Iranian emigres you talked to are not representative of the vast majority of Iranians. (Which is why they're emigres, obviously.)

Posted by: Steven L. at June 14, 2006 3:49 PM

Islam is the systematic program by which Islam's zombie-masters (aka imams) convert human beings into killer-Zombies.

Call that peace if you will. I call it a horror movie in real life.

Posted by: pythagoras at June 14, 2006 4:34 PM

Fantastic article by one of my fellow Vancouver, BC, Canadians.

Canadians DO get it - we are processing and dealing much better than the US in my humble opinion.

CD 'Bar' Baric

Posted by: blazar-jet at June 14, 2006 7:22 PM

Gordon Nickel shows that telling the truth about Islam can be done and must be done in order to let others know what we are up against.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 14, 2006 8:32 PM

blazar-jet:

You will agree with me I am sure that Islam and the totalitarian threat it presents to humanity is a matter far outweighing petty national rivalry issues.

The fact that you have injected nationalistic rivalry concerns into this matter is a red flag that YOU are not handling the matter as well as you might be.

As for Canada vs. the United States, this is something that does not really belong at this blog. National rivalry issues really are irrelevant in handling counter-terrorism. Whatever criticisms of US policy you might want to voice (some no doubt are legit), for the time being, most of the Islamic terrorists at large that are being removed from the world stage are being removed by American and/or by American-backed anti-terrorism forces. Canada has yet to make a comparable contribution in this area (and when it does it will be faced with a Guantanamo image problem as world opinion is generally against the jailing of terrorists for the time being it would appear).

A very good book that appeared in bookstores recently dealing with counter-terrorism is 'WAR FOOTING' by Frank Gaffney. Please examine it closely, my friend. It will show that there are plenty of Americans who are extremely well-versed on the threat to freedom posed by Islam and write excellent material on it. Even if you are unaware of them.

Posted by: pythagoras at June 14, 2006 11:14 PM

pythagoras: "You will agree with me I am sure that Islam and the totalitarian threat it presents to humanity is a matter far outweighing petty national rivalry issues."

I do.

pythagoras: "The fact that you have injected nationalistic rivalry concerns into this matter is a red flag that YOU are not handling the matter as well as you might be."

I have been watching authors on this site unfairly painting Canada with a rather broad dhimmi brush.

I apoligize for detracting from the general civility on this site - perhaps I am overly sensitive.

pythagoras: "A very good book that appeared in bookstores recently dealing with counter-terrorism is 'WAR FOOTING' by Frank Gaffney."

Thank you. I will look for it.

Best regards,

CD 'Bar' Baric

Posted by: blazar-jet at June 15, 2006 2:42 AM