We’ve got a serious tentacle-problem, here.
Spencer points out the crucial fact: sharia supremacists want the world submitted to Islam & the sharia law. Terrorism is one tentacle; sharia banking another; local sharia and polygamy another; no-go zones another; Hamas and Hizballah another; with the CAIR/ CIC lawfare and mainstreaming of such supremacism, and the re-definition of any criticism or concern as racism and Islamophobia. Whay do they hate us? Cuz we’re not all their biatches yet.
Back in the good old days of Jihad 1.0, you had Muslims and infidels. Infidels came in two classes: Jews/ Christians, and then everybody else. Under conquest Jews & Christians had to choose: convert, submit (with double-taxes & third-class status), or war. Everybody else got to convert, or war.
The idea that all Jihad is terrorism has been our mistake, says Spencer: more deadly is the “normalization” of Islamic demands in Western institutions and countries, so that sharia is seen as reasonable, and soft Islamic supremacism is openly advocated.
The root? Islam, as promulgated by the root of the tentacles, The Muslim Brotherhood, out of Egypt. The intent? That Islam shall rule the world, whether or not everybody converts at once, or open warfare is needed.
What was entire Steyn-Levant situation? A mere foretaste of the lawfare side of sharia supremacism. Egyptian-born Elmasry and his sock-puppets and legal enabler Fiasal Joseph did not have one goal, but many — chilling Western freedom, bullying government and media, hijacking western law by normalizing their categories of criticism = bigotry, and making a space for Islamic Supremacism in Canadian affairs. That work continues, under whatever guise and whoever the talking head. It’s more well-established in the U.S., as Spencer details.
Read it all.