Europe screwed up yet again when they allowed muslims into their country.

I think that sooner or later there will be a civil war in Europe between muslims and non-muslims.

Posted by: Voltaire at October 10, 2004 7:16 AM

Frankly, there's a lot to be said for the adage that a reactionary is only a liberal who's been mugged. The fact that the National Front in France could nudge the Socialists out of the national election--largely over the immigration issues--or that politicians like Hagen in Norway or the late Fortuyn in the Netherlands get a hearing are signs that Europe could well do a volte-face.

Posted by: Kepha1 at October 10, 2004 7:40 AM

Eurpe could sure do a volte-face but it may well be too late.

Post modernism has bred the balls out of europeans. they no longer have the will to fight for freedom. This generation of europeans is very different fromt eh ultranationalistic one that fought WWII. Those guys would've made then American generals look like diplomats. Notice that even today in EU, all those nations that showed a will to resist islam without PC were not post-modernist like western europe. They were newly freed from i=under the soviet yoke and still have a generation that values and is willing to fight for freedom.

Posted by: voletti at October 10, 2004 8:47 AM

Europe, as we have come to know it, is destined for the dustbin of history unless people wake up to the forces at work behind the scenes here. Europeans have taken this PC thing and have given it a new fervour. Take the UK as a case in point: The Home Secretary, David Blunkett, wants to pass a law to make it a CRIMINAL offence to criticize Islam. Criminal, mark you! If such a law comes into force, then it will mark a turning point in the direction of the once free United Kingdom. How can a culture survive when the people are no longer allowed to criticize the very people trying to destroy that culture? Add to that the Europeans' lack of will to fight for their culture and you have a recipe for eventual disaster!

Posted by: Mark at October 10, 2004 10:21 AM

Thank God we avoided a "Blunkett" here in Oz, with the re-election of Howard. Nicola Roxon, of the loser Opposition Party promised a similar Big Brother law here in Oz - pledging to outlaw religious villification, if elected. Brainless twit couldn't figure out why she was booed by the audience she uttered this codswallop to. Shows how out of touch the Labor party is. They have no clue why they don't appeal to the majority. And they never will get a clue. Too far out in left field, out in EUro-la-la-la Land. Thank God we're not spineless EUnuchs like Europe.

What's with this obsession with outlawing religious villification that the loony lefties have all of a sudden? We all know that this law is only used to avoid the light being shone on the repulsive Islam. It's already in the state of Victoria here (governed by loony left Labor state govt), and we see that it is being used and abused by Islamics to torment Christians. Loony lefties will gleefully villify Christians and Jews but don't touch their Islamic pals! We don't want to become like Europe, lefties! If you like the idea, move there! Don't f*** up our decent country with your failed socialist utopian ideas that have been proven time and time again to suck.

Posted by: feralee at October 10, 2004 10:45 AM

Guys, before you Americans rightly point out the desperate state of Europe , it might be as well to look closer to home. Read the above article about muslim educators teaching your children about islam - and all paid for with your tax dollars. Read how your government is helping to build mosques in Indonesia , eastern europe and Africa and about how easy it is for Palestinians to emigrate to the States while we Brits aren't even allowed a Green Card Lottery. It may be easy to keep pointing to Eurabia but let's face it, we're only just across the Mediterranian Sea from North Africa. It's not easy keeping the muslim hordes out. Look how well your border patrols have done in keeping Mexican immigrants out. How many was the last amnesty for illegals for, five or six million ? How many more millions have come in since then ?Seven , eight ? America is further from the problem - it's right on our doorstep. If it was North Africa and not Mexico south of you you would have thirty million muslims in the States and not just 3 million (out of a pop. of almost 300 million.). But look how just that tiny minority is embedding itself in your education system. Your universities and schools are more pro-muslim than Britains and we have 3 million muslims in a population of only 55 million.The point is that we shouldn't turn this into a "You're more dhimmi than we are" competition but should all try and realise that our governments are selling us down the river. We populations of the West are caught between a massive pincer movement. On one hand we have the Right (businesses, corporations etc) who want cheap muslim labour and cheap Arab oil and will sacrifice our cultures for it AND on the other side is the Left (the liberal PC & stalinist crowd) who hate everything the West stands for and wants to destroy it in the name of multiculturalism. Between those two forces we have to build a new political and cultural force that will not only beat the islamic jihad but will also put the left and the right to shame. We're all in this together, we will all suffer if islam wins - and if Europe goes America is next BUT if we stick together islam will destroy itself and just become a dark memory in human history.

Posted by: Son Of Albion at October 10, 2004 10:48 AM

I get so frustrated when I discuss Islamic terrorism with people here in England and they refuse to see any link between this violence and Islam itself, they keep on saying that Islam means peace and blame the USA and Israel for everything. I keep telling them to read the Koran then they would understand why there is so much terrorism in the world, but so far no one has taken up my suggestion.

This is a case of willful ignorance which unless something changes is going to be our downfall.

Posted by: Elephant at October 10, 2004 10:58 AM

Nicely put, Son of Albion - and Elephant.

What we are seeing is the gradual and deliberate Balkanization of Europe - and we know how peaceful and well-adjusted the Balkans have been since the Turkish invasions.

Hopefully the English Channel will protect Britain in the future as it has protected it from invasion since 1066. But if UK politicians don't wake up soon, I fear the Middle East will start at Calais...

Posted by: Benelux at October 10, 2004 12:35 PM

People in Glass Houses don't throw stones

One of the problems is that religionists in the US don't want to criticize Islam because they would have to acknowledge the short-comings in their own ideology. However, some Christian fundamentalists will criticize Islam because they understand the importance of ideas in people's behavior.

I thought it ridiculous when Bush was saying that "Islam in a Religion of Peace." He looked so much like a dhimmi when he was doing that. People in the West just cannot realize that there are some people on planet Earth that do not think like them. I noticed that Bush does not do that now. People in this country know better and they will know better when there are more terrorist attacks in this country. It doesn't take much money or planning to do a Beslan-style mass killing in just about any country.

Most people in this country are moral agnostics. They are so caught up in non-judgementalism that they cannot condemn anything. These people need to be taken out and shot.

Another thing is that few people know much about Mohammed's life and what the Koran says. I see these Muslims from CAIR come on TV and lie about their religion and say, "The Bible has verses like that too." Well, they can get away with that because none of the liberals know anything about the Bible. The Christians don't read the Koran, so they don't really have any basis for comparison.

Posted by: MetalMuncher at October 10, 2004 1:01 PM

I agree with Elephant: it is only America's geography which has saved us from a full-tilt Muslim invasion. Los Angeles has gone from a midwestern-flavored community a few decades ago to today's "Mexican city" as noted by its mayor.

I will say, however, that many ordinary Americans are not taking the open-borders assault passively. Here in California we passed Prop 187, voted for an end to affirmative action (more used by immigrants than the blacks for whom it was originally designed), and ousted Gov. Davis largely for signing a bill for illegal alien's drivers licenses. Signatures are now being gathered for another initiative that will create a constitutional amendment preventing the legislature from giving DLs to illegals.

In southern California, the popular John and Ken radio show is working to unseat two obnoxious open-borders Congressional reps, one from each party. When the radio guys have a public appearance to berate Rep. Dreier or Baca, many hundreds of angry citizens show up, and both Congressmen are scared. There are three new websites in support of "Political Human Sacrifice" put together by listeners who are sick of Mexifornia and all its ramifications.

http://www.johnandkenshow.com/

In Arizona, there is an initiative on the ballot to require voters to show IDs to prevent illegal alien voting. Prop 200 would also end welfare benefits to illegals. Naturally, nearly all politicians of both parties are against the measure, while polls show about 2/3 of the people approve.

Any populist uprisings in Europe? I'm sure there are many, particularly women, who don't buy the BS. I know of one immigration minimalist organization in Great Britain, but that's all I've heard of.

Posted by: Brenda at October 10, 2004 1:03 PM

Uh, oh. I should have said I agree with Son of Albion on the proximity element of immigration. Sorry about that.

Posted by: Brenda at October 10, 2004 1:09 PM

If anyone cares to read a truly sickening account of dhimmitude in Europe, take a look at:

http://www.flwi.ugent.be/cie/CIE/deley3.htm

This article, written by a Flemish Belgian for an Islamic organisation, was written six years ago. Numbers of Muslims entering the country both legally and illegally are much greater now.

Here's an extract from the article:

"A few months ago, actually, a report was published presenting the results of a research project conducted at the German university of Bielefeld. It concerns the attitudes among German youths of Turkish origin between 15 and 21 years of age. The results are alarming. These youngsters, according to the director of the project, Prof.Dr.Wilhelm Heitmeyer, are becoming more and more "fundamentalist", i.e. they are more and more prone to use violence on religious grounds, because they are experiencing difficulties while trying to integrate into society. The reason, though, for the disturbing findings is nót religion, i.e. Islam: it is rather European society itself which, according to Prof. Heitmeyer, is thwarting that process of integration. Not only Turkish youngsters in Germany, indeed, are confronted with this problem, but Muslim immigrants in all the countries of Europe. These youngsters should be full members of our society, but in reality they are constantly feeling expelled and rejected."

As usual, the reason for criminal behavour among young Muslims, and their attraction to fundamentalism, is nothing to do with Islam. Oh no, that is entirely the fault of the citizens of the host country for not being welcoming enough!

Many Belgians (including my great-uncle who was tortured to death by the Gestapo)gave their lives resisting Nazi occupation - as did many brave Americans, British, Canadians etc who helped liberate the country. All that bravery and blood shed just so that blinkered idiots like this can sell out their country to an even worse fascist ideology.

Posted by: Benelux at October 10, 2004 2:49 PM

Son of Albion - So very true. The scope of the problem is beginning to dawn on more and more people, but they still haven't decided how to react and what steps to take. We are in it together.

Posted by: epg at October 10, 2004 3:02 PM

I'm beginning to think that Islamization of the world is part of the scheme for control of the world, the new world order so to speak.

The idea is hard to digest because America is so Christian, but face it Islam is the perfect social control tool. Especially in a world with geometrically increasing population, and geometrically decreasing natural resources.

Each neighborhood has a mosque, and that population is under control of a cleric, who dictates and adjudicates the law (Shari'a), and thus keeps the populace under control.

So long as he recieves homage, social prestige, and economic power (through the religious tax), he will keep the population in control, with help from the religious police (matawain) who themselves will be supported by the ruling elite.
Just as in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan. In fact in Peshwar, Pakistan the uniformed civil police enforce religious laws.

(Some day the oil reserves will run dry, leaving huge sink holes, that will impact the crustal plates, because water and oil provide lubricant to tectonic plates, but that isn't the only diminishing resource, our tree cover, like rain forests, even metals, meanwhile there is the problem of feeding billions of people (3.4 billion in 1984, 6.4 billion today, 12 billion in ten years, 24 billion in 15, if people keep breeding at this rate), a difficult if not impossible task, with the process of desertification going on at an alarming rate.

Meanwhile these growing billions and their consumer demands foul the air and water, through production and consumption. Potable Water is a scarce resource, believe it or not, and much of it is increasingly being wasted and fouled.

Islam is the perfect social control ideology, all the owners or elite of the world have to do is cater to the socioeconomic status and needs of the ulama, the religious authorities. They will do the rest. Keep the people under control in a backwards, social setting.

That is what the Islamic religious authorities do, and that is what the fundamentalists want. Pure Islam, which is anti modern, anti progress. Education shifts from science, history, philosophy to religion.

Look at any Muslim or Muslim controlled or dominated country and take note of their dire circumstances and the priorities of their people and ulama.

Hint Turkey criminalized adultery. Iran stones adulterers. Pakistan also. Those arrested and stoned are in 99% of the cases women, especially women who have been raped, and who have shown up pregnant. Rape cannot be proven because it requires two male witnesses or four female witnesses. Any male "witnesses" would be accomplices, but no Muslim would dare testify against another muslim in these and other cases.

A violent revolt is underwayIn Algeria because the government, under European pressure, granted women rights.

The Interim Constitution of Iraq states that
Islamic Law (Shari'a) is the law of the land, and now women must have permission of a male guardian (which could be a mothers son if no one else) to get a passport, and travel.

The only squabbles then will be sectarian, Islamic school of ideology vs Islamic school of ideology, e.g. Sunni v Shia.

However the Wahhabi's in my opinion have already melded and synthesized Wahhibiyyah and Shi'i by creation of the Taliban, which means followers of the Student, and the student they refer to is Ali ibn Abu Talib, the Saint of the Shia, whom they consider the first Imam, Muhammads cousin and son in law, the fourth Sunni Caliph.

His name means Ali son of the father of the Student. And Ali's father was Muhammads brother and he was not named Student (Talib), the name is honorific. The name is anachronistic, an analogy would be to name the President, Dubya son of the Father of Bush43... circular and self referential.

Muhammads father was named Abd Allah (Abdullah), meaning Slave of Allah, as he was custodian of the meteorite (Ka'ba at Mecca)(which the Arabs believed was part of the moon and the abode of their god the moon or Allah).

For instance the Taliban exhibit Shia practices in which the Sayyids (descendants of Muhammad through his daughter Fatima and Ali his cousin) wear black turbans, where as others wear White Turbans. Osama, in case you didn't notice has shucked his Arab (Wahhabi) gutra and igal, for a white turban. And Taliban "religious" authorities, like Mullah Omar, call themselves Mullahs, which is an Iranian Shi'i title. Wahhabi religious authorities call themselves mufti.

I think that was Osama's mission in Pakistan and Afghanistan, to synthesize Wahhabiyya and Shi'i Islam, and apparently he has succeeded.

The current sectarian violence in Pakistan is probably a consequence of a conflict between those Shi'ites who don't want to merge with Wahhabiyyah (as they will lose socioeconomic status) and the new religion, the syncretic union of Wahhabiyyah and Shi'a that the Taliban represent.

Posted by: Giaour at October 10, 2004 3:09 PM

The short term outlook is indeed quite grim. The long run however, is another story altogether. Even if Eurabia does emerge, the doom and gloom scenarios currently circulating all make the same assumptions about the maintenance of current productive capacity. All ideological competitions throughout history have been decided by attrition. All wars are wars of attrition. The economies who run out of productive capacity first, lose. In the present clash between the ideology of the Muhammedans and the ideologies of the non-Muhammedan world, it is inevitable that the Muhammedan ideology will be defeated.

This forgone conclusion logically follows from the track record of the Muhammedan ideology throughout its history and the stark contrast with the performance of Western civilization. The Muhammedan ideology simply cannot be used to organize a market economy or political system that is even remotely close to the efficiency of the Western system. If the European economy falls under the influence of the Muhammedan ideology, we will see a steady year over year decline in GDP, distortions in income distribution, failures of industrial, agricultural and services markets, a return to 7th century human rights configurations, intellectual atrophy (loss of human capital), effacement of visual arts, music, performing arts, and literature from the worldview, and the entire continent will lose its ability to assimilate new technology. Capital formation will cease and it will simply consume the capital on hand today.

There are many more elements to this argument and scholars like Schumpeter, von Hayek, Kuznets, Berry, etc., have written many volumes on the subject.

The bottom line is that the Muhammedan ideology has proven for over 13 centuries to be an inferior organizing framework for a civilization than even the clunky command economy structures of Stalinism and Fascism and we all know what happened to those.

The Muhammedan world will always be a backwater relative to the non-Muhammedan world. Its inhabitants are doomed to eke out their meager existence always on the edge of famine, epidemic and intellectual desertification. We may never be able to exterminate it, but we can certainly contain it, as our ancestors have done for 1350 years.

Posted by: Hulegu Khan at October 10, 2004 3:14 PM

Hulegu Khan wrote:

'All ideological competitions throughout history have been decided by attrition. All wars are wars of attrition. The economies who run out of productive capacity first, lose.'

Oil is of strategic importance on all fronts:

1. Petro-dollars are financing Muslim expansion and Jihad.
2. Oil use is polluting the air we breathe.
3. Oil use is the cause of potentially-catastrophic global warning.

Cutting back our oil dependency will not only help save the planet but will deny funding to jihadists and the Wahabi missionaries. This is no longer simply desireable but is now ESSENTIAL.

As nations - and as individuals - we should all strive to use less petroleum products and to develop non-polluting alternatives. Using electric vehicles wherever possible (like public transport) is a small but positive step in the right direction.

We had a warning of the power of the oil weapon back in the 70's when the oil producers upped the price (wasn't this a consequence of Khomeini taking power in Iran?) with a resulting world recession. It was totally irresponsible of western governments not to heed the warning then and go all-out to develop alternatives to oil and the internal combustion engine. If they had taken the problem seriously back then, we might not be facing many of the urgent threats that confront us today.

Like a sick junkie facing death, we have to kick the oil habit!

Posted by: Benelux at October 10, 2004 3:49 PM

Hulega Kahn - Your argument is very true, but as Muslims are co-opting Western human capital, perhaps they have planned to use THESE people as units of production to support Muslims on the dole as their jizya payment.

Glaour - Fantastic analysis! Thank you for showing the synthesis of Wahab and Shia. This now makes greater sense.

Posted by: epg at October 10, 2004 5:49 PM

Western governments and the Western press have worked mightily to disguise, hide, or mis-identify the sources of Islamic terror and other hostile behavior by Muslims that might meet with Infidel disapproval. They have not even hinted at the palpable lack of identification with, much less loyalty to, the Infidel nation-state or the Infidels among whom those Muslims have been permitted to come and live among, and whom they regard with ill-concealed hostility – sometimes punctuated by ostentatious, unctuous, and transparent assertions of subscribing to a “peaceful” and “tolerant” faith – assertions that have no basis in reality.

The attitudes of Western elites comes inmost cases from fear. That is certainly true in countries, such as France, with large Muslim populations, where almost nothing can be publicly said against Islam, and where the greatest fear of the government is in admitting how fearful it is – and this when there is still time to express the fears, even the despair, of so many French citizens who experience the Muslim invasion in quite a different way, and are longing for leaders – liberal or conservative, not the beyond-the-pale Le Pesn – to express what needs to be expressed, to identify the problem, to address it forthrightly.

There is also ignorance. Like a Russian novel, where keeping track of Pyotr Ivanovich and Sonia Nikolayevna, and thirty others, can put one off, when it comes to studying Islam, many are fearful even of attempting to learn enough about Qur’an and hadith and sira to be able to withstand the smokescreens of nonsense and apologetics that float over and above and around all attempts to discuss the matter of what, exactly, is Islam. For even those who do not know the grim 1350-year record of Jihad-conquest and the imposition of dhimitude, know, or sense, or forefeel, that something is terribly wrong with this belief-system. For the maddened mobs, the hell-hounds of hysteria and hate, whom one sees screaming in Gaza or Sadr City or any of a thousand places, and their more accomplished or presentable allies, those imams and mullahs and journalists and diplomats in the Muslim world, who justify, who deny, who explain away, who never ever ever will dare to admit that Islam itself is what prompts the hatred of the Infidels who have done so much to make Iraq better. Even now American soldiers are constantly being attacked, attacked for attempting to rebuild schools and hospitals, roads and bridges, attacked by an ungrateful, hostile, and murderous people, who want to kill them – or at best to pocket whatever they can get from the Infidel Americans before reverting to hostile type – because they are Infidels. End of story.

Until a sufficient number of people among the Infidels understand what Islam is, understand that Islam is far more than shehada (Profession of Faith), and salat (the canonical prayers), and zakat (the charity but only to fellow Muslims), Ramadan (the month-long fast) and the hajj (made to Mecca, which becomes one vast, collective, and anti-Infidel procession, especially during the stoning of the pillars) – it is also a clear geopolitical program, requiring that Muslims all participate in Jihad, the struggle to push back the boundaries of dar al-Islam until the Islamic lands cover the globe, and all of the Infidel lands have been subjugated. And it includes the push to establish the rule of the Sharia everywhere, and with the Sharia, that system of legal disabilities, with economic, political, and social ramifications, that are imposed on all non-Muslims, who then are subject, at best (for killing, or outright conversion, are the only other possibilities), to a state of permanent humiliation, degradation, and physical insecurity. That is how lands once completely Christian and Jewish, and then Zoroastrian, became almost entirely Muslim – not because Islam was so wonderful, but because non-Muslims who were not killed (and history is punctuated by Muslim massacres of non-Muslims, even in the supposedly places, such as Andalucia, that have been subject to such romanticization) were subject to such steady, if low-level, oppression, that over time most of them converted, or “reverted” to Islam.

Another problem, especially obvious in the United States, is the way in which the belief-system of Islam is traditionally discussed as a religion, and in those whirlwind tours of the world’s religions, in textbooks, the authors carefully limit themselves to the Five Pillars of individual worship, and never mention the need for Jihad to expand the boundaries of Islam until it covers the globe, never mention the inculcated hostility toward all non-Muslims, never mention the historical record of Muslim treatment, or mistreatment, of non-Muslims, and never mention that Muslims have no truck either with the idea of pluralism or “diversity” except insofar as these concepts are temporarily useful for their own aims, in the tolerant West, in getting away with – not murder (the murders take place outside the West), but with support for such murder. The very word “religion” evokes reflexive respect among many, and helps to disguise the nature of Islam. It ought always to be jettisoned, when discussing Islam, in favor of the word “belief-system.”

Despite the fear, the ignorance, the baseless respect accorded something called a “religion,” the evidence of the real nature of Islamic belief mounts and mounts and mounts. Some have decided to figure out, by reading, what is in the Qur’an. Some have gone further, to learn that there are stories about Muhammad’s acts and sayings, called the hadith (or more properly, “ahadith” but Henry Fowler would not have approved of what in his immortal work is entered under didacticism). It is beginning to dawn on them that if Islam is a religion, it is a very strange and hostile and violent religion indeed. It is beginning to be clear that there is something else that goes on in those khutbas, or sermons, that what the imams and mullahs preach is not at all the kind of thing that one might assume, were one Christian, or Jew, or any other faith on earth.

We still have the squawking heads. Pundits, pontificators, self-assured “experts” on Islam, or World’s Greatest Authorities, the think-tank brigade – oh, there is Tom Friedman, and Jeffrey Sachs, and Zbigniew Brzezinski, and Anthony Cordesman, and of course John Esposito, and Carl Ernst, and Michael Sells, and a new contributor whose specialty is parroting the Saudi or Arab League line which goes, of course, that “it’s all about Israel, that’s the key”(version 1) or “it’s all about the American government, cowboy Bush, that’s the key” (version 2), one Dominic Lieven – who has the good fortune not to have ever troubled himself to study Qur’an, hadith, and sira, or to ask himself any difficult questions about what happens when hundreds of millions of people read, and study, and memorize, and hear again and again and again, on television, in the press, in their daily social intercourse, the same phrases, the same beliefs, the same attitudes, the same atmospherics – the atmospherics, attitudes, beliefs, phrases of orthodox Islam. For when it comes to the Infidels, there is no real difference between Wahahbi and Sufi, between Sunni and Shia. There may be some differences between Tunisia and, say, Saudi Arabia, on how much of the criminal law should conform to the classic Sharia; about the Infidels, there is no difference.

The newest members of the E.U. -- the Czech Republic, Hungary, Bulgaria, Poland in particular – have had a different historical experience from France in its self-duplicitous desarroi, and from the rest of Western Europe. They owe their freedomto the resolve of the United States, not to the countries of Western Europe. When Stalin was moving the Red Army into Eastern and Central Europe, the largest political groups in France and Italy were the Communist parties. The United States spent trillions of dollars, over nearly fifty years, on its own defense, and that of others, and on helping to rebuild Europe and Japan. This may be overlooked in France (how one longs for the spirit of Brissot de Warville, who stood up for the emancipation of the Jews, and supported the rights of “les noirs” (the blacks),during the Revolution, then came to America to consult the papers of Washington, and wrote an intelligent appreciation of the young republic, or later still, the spirit of the long-serving French ambassador J. J. Jusserand who actually took the trouble to learn about the United States, who admired this country, and knew that France needed this country, as it will yet again, and who wrote of Rochambeau and L’Enfant as if they were more than merely names to be invoked at some Washington gathering of the Great and Good), or the spirit of those French men and women who, fleeing the Nazis -- Henri Focillon and the “freres Alexandre, Kojeve and Koyre” come immediately to mind, found refuge and support in the United States. Would that Ambassador Lhevitte, instead of expressing French “indignation” at such things as publishing the names of the French people who profited so handsomely from the Oil-for-Food scandal, ought to begin, and so should everyone in the French diplomatic corps who has a mind, on whether that crook Chirac (Mr. Ambassador, you know perfectly well what I am referring to) and that preening poseur Dominique de Villepin (and you know what I am referring to here as well), should think about what Jusserand and Brissot and others meant when they talked of “Les Deux Mondes” and what real resonance and significance that could and should have, especially since that other formulation favored by D. de V. and the Euro-Arab Dialogue boys, “Les Deux Rives,” where some putative connection, a connection severed only by the Mediterranean, is conjured up for Europe and Muslim North Africa. But that is just the point: Muslim North Africa. If it were North Africa as the natural development of its pre-Islamic, Christian (Tertullian, St. Augustine) past, that would be one thing. It is precisely the hostile, immutable Manichean belief-system of Islam that makes all the difference – that is dragging North Africa down, after that French imperial interregnum of civilization, and which should not be allowed to drag France down – but it will, it will, unless enough of the French come to their senses. The policy of letting Muslim migrants in, and failing to confront the problem which is insoluble except by expulsion and forced conversion, is worse than a crime, as the French say – c’est une faute.

While in Paris the official position – of the Elysee, the Quai d’Orsay, the concierge and chasseur at those reception-rooms on the Avenue Kleber – French people whose lives are changing, and not for the better, because of the new and unopposed and even unrecognized Muslim invasion, think quite differently, but do not know where to turn. But in Bulgaria, Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and elsewhere, not having suffered through the self-imposed Euro-Arab Dialogue, there is still time either to practice sauve qui peut (and what French official can attempt to deny them that right? Jacques Chirac, that’s who.) and leave the E.U., or to so change the E.U. that France and Belgium, its most appeasing members, and the E.U. bureaucracy (Prodi, Patten, Solana et al) will have to reverse course, or suffer, or be jettisoned (it would be very good to end the careers, at once, of Solana, Patten, Prodi – by way of announcing that the Euro-Arab Dialogue, and all the appeasement in foreign policy, is over, and the counter-Jihad has now begun).

It is these countries, together with those in the Balkans, whose politicians, journalists, and writers can identify more clearly what the islamization of Europe would mean for individual rights, for women and non-Muslim minorities, for the continued pursuit of pure science, or of art, for literature as opposed to political trash (which is what Arabic literature has entirely become, as has almost all literary creation, save for a handful who have made it to the West, from the Islamic world). If “old Europe” is unhinged, that is no reason for “new Europe” to follow suit.

A permanent struggle for the continued survival of Western civilization is now underway. An accident of geology has permitted primitive peoples to acquire the wherewithal to pursue their Jihad, through the purchase of weaponry, through the funding of mosques and madrasas, through public relations campaigns, the bribery of diplomats, journalists, academic centers, businessmen through the dangling of contracts. It has all been working very smoothly. So smoothly, in fact, that it is unfortunate, from the Muslim point of view, that Bin Laden and others have had to be so – well, so public and obvious when there are so many other ways to obtain the same goal – the islamization first of the Western world, and then of the whole world. It seems fantastic. It seems impossible. But it is neither – just look at the demographic charts. And look, as well, at how susceptible so many people in the Western world are to the siren song of Da’wa, given their own psychically marginal existence, or their economically marginal existence, or their complete lack of appreciation for what has been achieved, slowly, in the West. By tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of thinkers, artists, scientists, theorists, who would not have lasted one minute under Islam.

War, some on the left like to say, is "not the answer." Right they are -- but not in the way they think. War -- bombs and guns and so on – is not the best way to defeat an ideological enemy. The sources of Muslim hostility, to be found easily in the canonical texts, and the understanding that what people learn, in a thousand different ways, about the need for Believers to subjugate and then humiliate Unbelievers (Infidels), wherever they are, and whatever the nature of their Unbelief, need to be widely understood. The immutability of this doctrine, the way in which Muslims who seem "moderate" may only be disguising their views for Unbelievers, or may not for now subscribe fully to Islamic tenets but can change on a dime, just the way Mike Hawash out in Oregon did,needs to be emphasized.

No, the islamization of Europe is not inevitable. If half-a-million people merely came to this website, it could make a great difference. If, in Europe, a half-dozen respectable Pim Fortuyns could appear, if the full malevolence and danger of the belief-system of Islam were to be exposed in book after book, and by speaker after speaker, this would all help.

It can be done.

Posted by: Hugh at October 10, 2004 6:06 PM

Awesome post Hugh - if only it were the leader comment in every Western newspaper tomorrow !

Posted by: Son Of Albion at October 10, 2004 6:38 PM

MetalMuncher posted:

"One of the problems is that religionists in the US don't want to criticize Islam because they would have to acknowledge the short-comings in their own ideology."

I strongly disagree with this observation. Christians are much less fearful of debating their scriptures than Muslims. In fact, the most accurate observations of Islam come from Christians like Robert Spencer because they are not as morally confused as most so-called "secular humanists." Hence they are less likely to be silenced by the idiotic moral equivalencies paraded by idiots like Nicolas Kristof or Karen Armstrong.

Furthermore, mainstream Christians are not obligated to treat the Bible as the direct word of God. There is a BIG difference in interpretation between a holy book written by people presumably INSPIRED by God, and another DICTATED by God's number one angel (Gabriel).

This is not to say that being Christian is a prerequisite winning the war of ideas. Several regulars here on the forum like Cubed and Mason do an excellent job of dissecting Islam from an objectivist perspective. I for one consider myself an agnostic.

But those who antagonize Christianity are undermining one of the strongest foundations for resisting Islam. Do you really want America to become the post-Christian moral free-for-all that is Europe?

Don't undermine your strongest allies against the jihad.

Posted by: Rublev at October 10, 2004 7:52 PM

Hugh - An awesome and informative post that should be read to each and every politician, university faculty, think-tank , and authority in the Western World, as well as to every journalist that should ponder, comment and report to the peoples of the world as soon as possible.

There is gap, no a chasm, between the intellectual elites and ordinary people than see and feel the danger. THEY must be made to see and understand what we know and feel.

Posted by: epg at October 10, 2004 11:20 PM

The very word “religion” evokes reflexive respect among many, and helps to disguise the nature of Islam.

Completely agree with you on this point. For me it even goes further, Muhamedism is the ultimate wolf in sheep's clothing.

It ought always to be jettisoned, when discussing Islam, in favor of the word “belief-system.”

"Belief-system" is still too warm and fuzzy. For me it evokes too much benign "fill-in-the-blanks left behind by science and reason" connotations a la Durkheim and Weber. I much prefer the term "ideology", as it allows the full import of the dimensions of politics, economics, social organization, and culture. It also allows the true juxtaposition of the Muhamedan ideology with the competition, the non-Muhamedan ideologies of the world. We are witnessing not a clash of civilizations, implying that both sides are "civilized", but a clash of over a billion adherents of the Muhamedan ideology with the rest of the world:

"...he [Mohamet] declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind..The precept of the Koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God." --President John Quincy Adams

In August 1939, the world was challenged by the 170 million adherents of the ideology of fascism. It took a global conflagration on the greatest scale the world has ever known to defeat it. Now we are confronted by over a billion who will no doubt rise up against us as the global jihad progresses. They will choose the interests of their ummah over the welfare of the non-Muhamedans, always.

Woe to our generation that is now witnessing just the opening salvos of perhaps the most horrific conflict in the history of mankind.

Posted by: Hulegu Khan at October 11, 2004 12:37 AM

I'm always amazed at the scholarship posted in these comments.

Hugh - I'm blown away with his outstanding comments!
He wrote . . .

"No, the islamization of Europe is not inevitable. If half-a-million people merely came to this website, it could make a great difference. If, in Europe, a half-dozen respectable Pim Fortuyns could appear, if the full malevolence and danger of the belief-system of Islam were to be exposed in book after book, and by speaker after speaker, this would all help.

It can be done. "

Later, "Son of Albion" also pointed out that every Western paper should print this.

I wholeheartedly agree.

I often send links re: JW/DW articles to a variety of websites, blogs and online papers. I also forward articles of interest to friends and family. I admit my pals think I'm whacky at times, but since this site also provides links to sources - it is those very links that lend credibility and dismiss blame from radical thinking. The most frequent response I receive is "I didn't read that in my paper!" or "I didn't see that on the news" - why?"

I'm heartened that my point is taken.

Re: Hugh's "It can be done." Yes, and it must!

I'm techically challenged . . .& not particularly web saavy. . .so this may sound like a dumb "?"
Are JW/DW translated in different languages or do foreign readers need special translation software to read this site?

Robert Spencer provides an incredible resource, and JW/DW could gather and benefit the masses if it were readily translated.

Posted by: justamomof4 at October 11, 2004 12:56 AM

'Western governments and the Western press have worked mightily to disguise, hide, or mis-identify the sources of Islamic terror and other hostile behavior by Muslims that might meet with Infidel disapproval'

There is little doubt now, that this is truth even as we witness the UN coming under nigh on total islamic cintrol.

Why, Oh why has this subterfuge happened over such a short period of time , perhaps since the late 1960s. what catastrophic combination of events have led to this state of play.
SOme serious enlightment on this subject would be well appreciated.
Surely the french with their glorious culture, which they appear to cherish deeply, should have been the first to attempt to reverse this ?

Posted by: george at October 11, 2004 1:50 AM

Hugh wrote:
"No, the islamization of Europe is not inevitable. If half-a-million people merely came to this website, it could make a great difference. If, in Europe, a half-dozen respectable Pim Fortuyns could appear, if the full malevolence and danger of the belief-system of Islam were to be exposed in book after book, and by speaker after speaker, this would all help."
Problem is: In tolerant Holland Pim Fortuyn was shot dead, not by a muslim though, but by an animal rights activist who subsequently was sentenced to 18 years prison, not a very deterrent punishment, considering that in the Dutch system the murderer automatically is a free man again after 12 years. An author who wishes to write a book to expose the full malevolence and danger of the belief-system of Islam, will have difficulty to find a publisher, and if he finds one, his book will not easily be available in the bookshops, this in marked contrast with the many many books of which huge numbers are sold and in which educated europeans can read what they wish to read, and which confirms what they already read in their high quaity newspapers, i.e. that Islam is really a peaceful religion, that the problem is Israel, that Sharon is a vilain, that American foreign policy is completely misguided, that Bush is a dangerous dumbhead and so on and so on.
A speaker who wishes to expose the danger of the Islam had better pay a large amount of money to hire a couple of body-guards.
I still hope that the islamization of Europe is not inevitable. But in the general opinion-climate, nourished by the main-stream media, university-professors, history-teachers and the examples of leading politicians, a rare courage is needed to take publicly a clear stand against the islamization of Europe.

Posted by: Kees Rudolf at October 11, 2004 4:18 AM

I'm hoping that if a European country does become an Islamic republic, then that will put the fear of god into the rest of Europe and all other western countries which a muslim population.

Hopefully, countries will forget about political correctness, and will ban Islam and boot all muslims out.

Posted by: Voltaire at October 11, 2004 4:26 AM

"Why, Oh why has this subterfuge happened over such a short period of time , perhaps since the late 1960s. what catastrophic combination of events have led to this state of play."

I shake my head in frustration and ask the same question all the time, george. It's as if some sort of mental illness, some sort of madness has overcome a large segment of our population to bring us to this point. We clearly see the problem. Islam. We see its evil. Yet many don't. Many whom we would term intelligent and educated, and champions of human rights and equality. Yet they seem so astonishingly stupid and pig-headed when it comes to accepting the danger of Islam. Do they hate Western values and culture so much? If they do, why? Nobody's perfect but surely they can see that Western society provides the best life for all. Better than a society that advocates slavery, beating wives, death to homosexuals, amputating hands of thieves, denying other religions the right to freely practise, keeping women hidden and subjugated, etc. Islam goes totally against all that the Left so fervently espouses, so it makes litle sense that the Left goes to bat for Islam all the time.

Posted by: feralee at October 11, 2004 5:19 AM

Yes Feralee, i too ask myself why the left is obssessed with the defence of Islam.
I used to think that somehow the left were imbued with a self hatred due to the "sins of western Imperialism" and therefore anyone outside was termed a "victim" and worthy of full support and incapable of evil, evil being something only reserved for western civilisation.
Then of course there is the fall of communism and the demise of all their heroes and icons, so Islam became a substitute.
Even here in Australia one encounters regularly, intellectuals who refuse to read books such as Bat yeor's Islam and Dhimitued, or dismiss it as racist or of merely historical value .
Yet Australia, in spite of the nauseous left wing press such as the SMH and the ABC and SBS seems far more aware than europe of the threat we face.
I think Howard is in no doubt about it and will face up to it.

Posted by: george at October 11, 2004 5:59 AM

Following on from the comments about the willingness of our media to always try to hide the true nature of islam , has any one else noticed that the BBC have completely failed to mention the release of the video of Ken Bigley's beheading. Although I've now seen this news on several US websites the pro=islamic BBC have ignored the video's release despite the fact that they usually mention all other video releases. Is this because the BBC are worried that if the British people found out how appalingly Bigley died then the public mood would swing against islam ?

Posted by: Son Of Albion at October 11, 2004 6:13 AM

Voltaire wrote:

"I'm hoping that if a European country does become an Islamic republic, then that will put the fear of god into the rest of Europe and all other western countries with a muslim population."

Yes, this seems the most likely scenario - if the situation is not overtaken by other events (such as a US/Israeli assault on Iran in the very near future.)

The question is: which European country is most likely to be in the unenviable position of being western Europe's first islamic state? Personal experience suggests it may well be Belgium since that country's rival Flemish/Walloon politicians are so busy squabbling amongst themselves to notice or care that cities such as Brussels now have majority Muslim populations making ever increasing demands.

Another possibility is that as the situation worsens and becomes undeniable by even the most blinkered politicians, the military in some countries may be compelled to mount a coup d'etat. Citizens of Europe may have to be 'liberated' from their own indifferent governments in the way they were liberated from German occupation in two world wars.

Posted by: Benelux at October 11, 2004 9:17 AM