• Why Jihad Watch?
  • About Robert Spencer and Staff Writers
  • FAQ
  • Books
  • Muhammad
  • Islam 101
  • Privacy

Jihad Watch

Exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts

That Imaginary War Room

Jun 17, 2015 8:38 pm By Hugh Fitzgerald

Dr._Strangelove_-_The_War_RoomWe have all had fantasies — have we not? — of being President or Chief of Staff, and being present, somewhere in the Pentagon, in a War Room that, we like to think, directs that campaign of self-defense against the hydra-headed Jihad.

And we like to imagine, too, what might go on in that room, what kinds of things we hope are being discussed and planned.

Consider, among the many imagined scenarios, these three:

1) A War Room devoted to the counter-Jihad in the Muslim World itself. In this War Room, the computers bristle with information about the active fighting going on in the Middle East and North Africa (Libya) and Central Asia (Afghanistan), and with news of what war materiel has been requested, and is being sent, and what troops have been sent, too, to Egypt, to Iraq, to Jordan, to Yemen, to a dozen other possible places. And there are solemn debates about how to keep the countries of the Middle East from being “failed states” and succeeding, thanks to our help, with the assumption being that this is the only conceivably correct goal.

2) A War Room devoted to the domestic front — for by now there would be recognition that there is a war inside our countries, too. That would take the form of non-military aid being given to “moderate” Muslims in the United States and Western Europe, who, if only they are given enough access to, and support from, Western leaders and the media, and funds, too (as the French government supplies so generously to what it thinks are “tame because government-subsidised mosques” in France), these “moderates” will be able to sway the local Muslims, now within the West by the millions, to embrace, unswervingly, democratic ideals, and what those ideals imply, such as freedom of speech and freedom of religion. And little is said about what is in the Qur’an and Hadith; for the planners, such a discussion would only complicate matters, would make what they are doing seem even less plausible, would show up the egg on too many faces. So what is in the Qur’an, as glossed by the Sunnah (Hadith and Sira), doesn’t come up. It’s “real people” who are being kept in mind in this particular War Room.

3) Finally, in the third of our imagined War Rooms, everyone is already well-versed in Islam, and disinclined to deny what is contained in the texts; disinclined, too, to find reasons to explain or interpret away those texts. The strategies of denial that were in fashion for so very long, despite all the evidence, have finally been put to rest. And it is the members of this hard-headed group, chastened by more than a decade of experience dealing with Islam and Muslim peoples, in this War Room, on whose computer screens would be displayed the strategies for demoralizing and dividing the Camp of Islam. Not much about soldiers and weapons here, for military intervention in Muslim lands is not regarded as much use. It has only allowed Muslims to blame the interfering Infidels, and not one another, nor themselves. But in this War Room, measures are discussed to limit, in the West, the survival — or still worse, spread — of intellectual bromides about Islam that do not correspond to what the best-prepared students of the subject, which includes the “defectors” from Islam such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and Wafa Sultan, and Ibn Warraq, tell us that Islam inculcates. The internecine conflicts within the Muslim world would not be deplored, but regarded with grim satisfaction, knowing that such conflicts have no natural end.

Indeed, who thinks the conflict in Syria will come to an end, or that Syria itself can possibly be reconstituted? How exactly would the bitterest of enemies now make peace and live together? It isn’t possible. Instead, in this War Room the discussion would be about how refusing to intervene leads to a better outcome for the West, if not for Muslims.

And in this War Room, a great deal of the planning would be about how best to support and protect  non-Muslim figures, especially those members of the media who, having prepared themselves at length by appropriate reading of Qur’an and Hadith, and a lot else besides, are of great national worth, for everyone who writes in a no-nonsense fashion about Islam has overcome an atmosphere of such nonsense and lies as to deserve a Pulitzer just for that mental persistence. Instead of mockery, they deserve  thanks, support, and dissemination of their message.

The theme of the third imagined War Room is Division and Demoralization — of Muslims. This involves exploiting, often by not moving to mend, the fissures within the Muslim Camp, the main one being that between Sunni and Shi’a, but there are also the ethnic hostilities between Arab and non-Arab Muslims, most obviously between Arab and Kurd in Iraq, but hardly limited to that case. The non-Arabs can be encouraged to note, and resent, the conviction of the Arabs that they are superior in the Muslim hierarchy, that it is right that non-Arabs must forget their own histories and civilization, for as Muslims they must  read the Qur’an in Arabic, turn Arabia-wards five times a day in prayer, emulate the mores of 7th century Arabs, and ideally take Arab names. That resentment surely can be encouraged; the rich pre-Islamic pasts of many Muslim peoples could be written and spoken about, and the consciousness raised about how Islam has razed history the way the Islamic State has razed historical monuments.

Of the three, which do you favor? Do you think constant military intervention, and especially the wars in Iraq, and in Afghanistan, and the overthrow of Qaddafi in Libya, have been a wise use of Western resources? Is Islam weaker as a result? Has the West been made more secure? And is the Muslim presence in the West smaller or larger, and growing? Has the experience of the past 15 years made a sufficient number of people in the West more aware of what they face, or simply anxious and confused, and feeling things are out of their hands, “there is nothing we can do,” for example, when our governments increase the number of Muslim immigrants?

Have the “moderate Muslims” in Europe, other than an occasional showy denunciation of this or that Islamic State outrage as “un-Islamic,” done a single thing to further the right education of non-Muslims, and to come to grips with the need to discuss, in order if possible to modify (as Ayaan Hirsi Ali holds out, just, as a possibility), through interpretation, what is contained in the Qur’an and, especially, the Hadith? They have not, and they cannot. So it is up to the people in that imaginary third War Room to help create demoralization, as well as to do nothing to prevent division within the Camp of Islam.

How many Muslims are capable of interpreting the Qur’an in such a way, and ignoring so much of the Hadith, as Ayaan Hirsi Ali suggests will be necessary if there is to be co-existence, or any sort of harmony? Many? Few? And how might one encourage their numbers to grow, or even to encourage people to do that seemingly impossible thing, leave Islam altogether? One way, as those in that third War Room know, is to make public as much news about the relative performance of Muslim peoples and states as possible. Long ago, the scholar Armand Abel wrote an article that deserves widespread study:  “Underdevelopment, stagnation, and decadence. The study of a psychotype: the case of Islam.” Why is it that Muslim states have not created modern economies? The handful of Croesus-rich oil sheikdoms are not exceptions; they are rentier-economies, dependent on the result of an accident of geology. What Muslim state has succeeded, or put differently, is it not true that those Muslim states that have either had a significant non-Muslim population (as Lebanon and Malaysia) or a long secular history (Kemalist Turkey), have created those economies not dependent on the three mainstays of most Muslim states: oil, Western tourism, Western foreign aid?

This third War Room would conduct a campaign to unsettle and demoralize the enemy, a war of propaganda. It involves holding up, for constant inspection and discussion, all the ways that Islam itself can be considered a retrograde (Churchill’s word) force. Does Islam encourage democracy, or in Islam is the despot to be obeyed as long as he is Muslim? Does Islam encourage economic innovation, or does Islam denounce bida (innovation, new ways of doing things)? Does Islam encourage equality of the sexes and equal treatment of minorities under law? What is the evidence that we see before us, presented in the news every day? Does Islam encourage people to think for themselves, or does it discourage free and skeptical inquiry? Have you heard of anyone being lashed recently, or attacked by a mob, or killed, because that someone dared to question something about Islam? Raif Badawi in Saudi Arabia, the freethinkers hacked to death in Bangladesh, the endless attacks on those who dare to think for themselves in Pakistan, the endless prison sentences meted out in Iran — what should we make of this, if not that Islam does indeed punish free inquiry? Can’t you feel sympathy for the people living in these places, who think for themselves but can never express it?

The third War Room would offer subventions to publishers, so that works by ex-Muslims, as valuable as that of defectors from the KGB, would appear, in millions of copies, small in format so that they could be easily smuggled in, and of course — most important — there would be websites, well-publicized websites, where such works could be read in full.

Islam itself is the source of the many failures, political, economic, social, moral, and intellectual, of Muslims themselves. How many times have I said this? It is the spelling out of that proposition that requires efforts, at length,  ad nauseam, till it all seems so obvious that no one in his right mind could disagree. That is the task of this ideal War Room. Political failure: the despot is permitted in Islam; the citizen, rather than the subject, protected by civil rights that we take for granted in the West, does not exist. That is not complicated to say, but apparently complicated enough so that many refuse to understand.  Economic failure: inshallah-fatalism, the belief that everything is in the hands of Allah, who can undo our efforts at whim, and to whom we also owe our riches (and the oil of the Gulf might be seen to confirm it), suggests to Muslims that neither hard work, nor entrepreneurial flair, are either sufficient or necessary. And the readiness of the West to supply aid to so many Muslim states has allowed them to think of this, too, as a kind of jizyah, a tribute exacted on the non-Muslims to which they willingly submit, manna that will not stop.

Those in the third War Room should not be swayed by talk of “failed states.” They should stop all American aid to Muslim states, in order to allow the economic failures of Islam to become more apparent to Muslims themselves. Social failures: the War Room will promote discussion of how women are mistreated in Islam, how minorities are treated, and why these reflect the teachings of Islam, clearly misogynistic and clearly uninterested in the position of non-Muslim minorities. Moral failures: vide the Islamic State. Or see how both sides treat the other side in Syria or Libya or Yemen or Iraq. This is what that War Room should be publicizing, talking about, forcing Muslims to talk about.

The Islamic basis for Muslim failure is now much more widely understood among non-Muslims; websites such as this one have had a considerable role in forcing this understanding. But the trick is to force Muslims to understand the sources of their own unhappinesses of so many different kinds. Look at Al-Sisi. Do you not sense in him someone who knows that Islam has to be modified, or re-interpreted, or if nothing else will work, ruthlessly constrained, as he is doing with the True Believers the Muslim Brotherhood? For Al-Sisi is afraid of the effect of too much Islam, taken straight up, on the minds of True Believers. And that is because he has spent decades thinking about Islam, and having studied in the United States, surely noted from afar the very failures that we’ve been discussing.

Would that in the Pentagon and the White House there were more who have come to the conclusion that Islam itself, with its amazing power over the minds of men, is the problem. Then imagine a thousand articles commissioned by that War Room from authorities in different fields: economists would write about the lack of major innovation in Islamic world, political scientists would write about  the persistence of despotism in the Islamic world, sociologists would study the comparative treatment of women, and the position of minorities; psychologists would write about the moral insensitivity of Muslims to the suffering of their enemies (see those Yazidi women). This would create an atmosphere — call it demoralization —  that could force Muslims to admit that something was wrong, and then to begin to analyze the problem correctly, and not find themselves suppressed. The ability to think would come, albeit slowly. All of this has been said before, and all must be said again and again.

But isn’t this the essential strategy worth trying, not only in that Ideal War Room of our imagination, but in the real one?

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)

Follow me on Facebook

Filed Under: Featured, Islamic reform, Islamic State (aka ISIS, ISIL, Daesh), Jihad doctrine, United States Tagged With: Pentagon, War Room


Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Comments

  1. livingengine says

    Jun 17, 2015 at 9:13 pm

    Welcome back Hugh Fitzgerald!!!

  2. Angemon says

    Jun 17, 2015 at 9:14 pm

    Going by the likes of, for example, CAIR or Asghar Bukhari, the War Room pictured in the third scenario already exists – someone has to be funding the alleged “islamophobia network” and send special agents to steal shoes.

    • mr clem snide says

      Jun 18, 2015 at 5:27 am

      ssssshhhh …. we mustn’t let slip the existence of the world-wide network of
      Shoe Stealers.

      • TheBuffster says

        Jun 18, 2015 at 9:40 am

        Mr. Snide, I thought the network was common knowledge already.

  3. jihad3tracker says

    Jun 17, 2015 at 9:15 pm

    *********** THANK YOU, MR. FITZGERALD, ON BEHALF OF MYSELF AND TENS OF THOUSANDS READING JIHAD WATCH — FOR POSTING SUPERB ANALYSES REGARDING ISLAM ***********

    The astonishingly brave Pam Geller and her colleague Robert Spencer risk their lives every hour of every day — 24/7 — to keep America alive. LITERALLY . . . THAT IS NOT AN EXAGGERATION.

    They know that if our Constitution’s 1st Amendment falls under the Muslim war machine due to cowardice and clueless disregard of necessary vigilance, it is only a matter of time before we all go under.

    Repeating what I’ve said previously : I am a 66 year old lifelong Democrat — thoroughly disgusted by ethically compromised seditionists like Hillary Clinton, who would stab our Founding Fathers in the back for money.

    TO OUR YOUNG CURRENT GENERATION, WORLD WAR TWO AND NAZI SUPREMACISM MIGHT AS WELL HAVE HAPPENED A MILLION YEARS AGO. But we who educate about Islamic totalitarianism must draw the clear parallel to it.

  4. Don McKellar says

    Jun 17, 2015 at 9:25 pm

    HUGH FITZGERALD RETURNS!

    OUTSTANDING!

    I will now take my time reading a no doubt well thought out piece with much to contemplate. Thank you very much.

    Don McKellar
    aka
    Abraham_Lincoln

  5. Matthieu Baudin says

    Jun 17, 2015 at 10:08 pm

    An excellent, thought provoking piece, perhaps helping to lead a way out of the current phoney war, post Sept 11th 2001. Many thanks.

  6. dsinc says

    Jun 17, 2015 at 10:25 pm

    Thanks Hugh, I also say thanks for the short titles which enable me to save your contributions to my hard drive, given that I am still using Windows XP.

  7. mortimer says

    Jun 17, 2015 at 10:33 pm

    Agree with Fitzgerald: Islam per se should be identified as the source of the problems.

    This point is made by Henri Boulad, SJ of Alexandra:

    “Islamism is not a caricature, nor a counterfeit, nor a heresy, nor a fringe or atypical phenomenon versus classical, orthodox, Sunnite Islam.

    To the contrary, I think Islamism is naked Islam, Islam without a mask and without paint, Islam perfectly consistent and true to itself, an Islam that has the courage and lucidity to go all the way to its ultimate conclusions and final implications.

    Islamism is Islam in all its logic and in all its rigour. Islamism is present in Islam as the chick is present in the egg, as the fruit is present in the flower and as the tree is present in the seed.

    But what is Islamism?

    Islamism is political Islam, the bearer of a project for a model society and whose aim is to establish a theocratic state based on Sharia, the only legitimate law—since it is divine—since it was revealed and enshrined in the Koran and Sunna—it’s a law that applies to everything.

    Here is an all-inclusive and all-encompassing project, one that is total, totalizing and totalitarian.”

    • Alarmed Pig Farmer says

      Jun 18, 2015 at 10:34 am

      Islamism is political Islam.

      Yes and no. All of Islam is political, because Islam is not just a religion per se. It is a three legged beast, a ghastly tripod, that is (1) religion, (2) government and (3) military. The second is Sharia; the third is Jihad. Islam presented as only a religion is a fool’s projected from his own world view, be he a Christian, a Jew, a Hindi, a Buddhist, a secular humanist atheist descended from Judeo-Christianity, or whatever.

      Just saying. Not saying you claimed that the tripod has but one leg, or that you or a fool. Just saying is all.

      • spot on says

        Jun 18, 2015 at 2:11 pm

        It is a three legged beast,

        Taking down Islam is a tremendous task but it is good to see an effort to put some thought to it. It is indeed “a three legged beast”. Hitler failed in the creating his third leg, the religion that would support his Third Reich.

        The problem I see is when the numbers are crunched, we get 1 out of 6 Jihadists in every batch of graduates from the madrassas. This is Russian Roulette odds? The percentage is much higher when certain groups are converted to Islam such as criminals. Some people are not violent by nature and others are not religious by nature. They will steer away from Jihad. These people are not the problem but there is no way to sort out the good from the bad. The good ones will be intimidated by the Jihadists to support the Jihad in every way. This creates a formidable fighting force that will (and has) regenerate itself into perpetuity.

        The answer, I believe, lies in prohibitions on certain Muslim activities and a massive campaign to undermine any violent behavior within the Muslim community. Frankly, I don’t see this happening and more likely it will need to come down to serious war against Islam.

        I hope I am wrong because the way our government is now thinking, they are likely to side with the Muslims.

  8. MoeFoe says

    Jun 17, 2015 at 10:36 pm

    Hugh is back!!! What a ticket would Spencer-Fitzgerald be for 2016!!!. (or Fitzgerald-Spencer – work it out between yourselves). I cannot believe this paring would be elected but the publicity for the anti-jihadist cause would be invaluable.

    MoeFoe sends

  9. Buraq says

    Jun 18, 2015 at 12:52 am

    Well, well, well! Today, on the 200th anniversary of the battle of Waterloo, Hugh Fitzgerald comes galloping over the horizon like General Blücher with reinforcements. A welcome sight. The day is ours!

  10. Sabri S. says

    Jun 18, 2015 at 4:51 am

    …and exactly what is the point of this imaginary drivel and nonsense.
    for a bunch of bigots and disrespect ful islamophobes, you sure enjoy
    interfering in other people’s lives. GET OUT OF THE MIDDLE EAST AND
    MUSLIM LANDS AMERICA!!!….Now, that is imaginary….lol

    • Shirish Inamdar says

      Jun 18, 2015 at 5:51 am

      Sabri……I pity you! are you asking for the meaning of ‘Interference in others’ life”? Islam spread by Agression, Subversion and Exploitation. It was Geographical, Intellectual, Spiritual, Social, Political, Economical and above all Moral (going by the so called Divine Messages in Qu`raan) intereference of the highest degree in the history of Mankind. its leaders are taking the entire Muslim Community reverse on the Time Wheel by harping on the irreparable historical facts. Those ignorant Bigots do not want to look into Future but like to rot themselves in the Past. Islam is the youngest Religion (is it one…?) in the world …….but does not deserve any pardon as it is also the most monstrous thought process. If the Islamist continue to embrace the Past with their both hands, they will not be able to live the Present niether they will be well come to gret their Future with open hands.

    • MacUalraig says

      Jun 18, 2015 at 6:18 am

      They’re not Muslim lands.

    • RonaldB says

      Jun 18, 2015 at 8:40 am

      I think Fitzgerald’s point of view actually agrees that the US should not intervene in Muslim countries to stabilize the governments, promote democracy, or provide aid to shore up the rotten foundation of Islam by alleviating its natural consequences.

      Of course, by leaving the Middle East, you also mean Israel, although the land of Israel was bought through the Turkish government when your last Caliph actually reigned, and the Jews there immigrated with the permission and support of the Turkish government. But, Muslims, who are great at legalisms when it comes to applying the barbaric sharia law to defenseless individuals, are not so quick to recognize a legal situation not to their liking.

      Anyway, it is very much in the interest of the United States to provide diplomatic support to Israel, commercial ties, and military cooperation with Israel on the basis of mutual benefit. I for one would not be unhappy to see actual monetary aid to Israel slowly phased out, as government to government grants always subsidize the weakest points of the recipient’s economy and social structure.

      But, make no mistake: the presence and self-driven success of Israel is a massive show of advantage for Western culture and philosophy.

    • TheBuffster says

      Jun 18, 2015 at 10:08 am

      Oh, Sabri, I just don’t understand how you can believe that God, Allah, would make a prophet out of a guy like Mohammad. Given all the awful things he did in the name of Allah – do you really believe a god worthy of worship and respect would send a prophet to raid caravans and spread Sharia by the sword? Why would Allah pick Mohammad to be a prophet and an example for Muslims to follow, when surely Allah would know that Mohammad would be sexually attracted to a little girl. Such a bad precedent for a holy man to set.

      If you’ve read the Koran and the Bukhari or Muslim Hadith collections, how *can* you not see that Mohammad was making it up as he went along. Unable to answer rational questions from unbelievers with rational answers, he resorted to insults and threats of Hell. He granted himself more wives than the allowable four, claiming Allah told him that he could. He got his followers to murder people who mocked him.

      I could never respect such a man or worship such a god whose character is so far beneath my own. Thank goodness not all Muslims try to emulate Islam’s ideal man.

      Normal human beings have a better sense of right and wrong than Mohammad, with or without religion.

      • PRODOS says

        Jun 18, 2015 at 10:35 pm

        TheBuffster makes some excellent points.

        Most notably: “Normal human beings have a better sense of right and wrong than Mohammad, with or without religion.”

        Indeed, Islam — rather than adding and improving upon every good person’s natural moral sensibility — seems to hollows it out.

        Many Apostates have noted this experience.

        Sabri, your words and your tone make you come across as foolish and morally handicapped. I am not trying to be insulting, merely reporting the general impression you are creating, unfortunately.

        If Islam is truly good, then why, with your example, do you make it appear bad? Isn’t this a problem?

        If Islam is truly good, it would be better if you could exemplify this in your words and in your tone. That would make you more persuasive, wouldn’t it?

    • Champ says

      Jun 18, 2015 at 1:42 pm

      Oh great the lying “Savage S.lave” is back with more of his twisted logic …

      He is just another lost cause serving an evil cause: islam.

    • Angemon says

      Jun 18, 2015 at 2:06 pm

      The deficient muslim posted:

      “…and exactly what is the point of this imaginary drivel and nonsense.”

      Who’s imagining it? We? You? All of us?

      “for a bunch of bigots and disrespect ful islamophobes, you sure enjoy
      interfering in other people’s lives.
      ”

      How are we “bigots”, how are we “islamophobes”, and how are we interfering in anyone’s life?

      “GET OUT OF THE MIDDLE EAST AND
      MUSLIM LANDS AMERICA!!!….Now, that is imaginary….
      ”

      Indeed – there is no such thing as “muslim lands”, there’s only occupied Christian, Jewish and pagan lands.

      • PRODOS says

        Jun 18, 2015 at 9:32 pm

        Angemon writes: “there is no such thing as ‘muslim lands’, there’s only occupied Christian, Jewish and pagan lands.”

        True.

    • PRODOS says

      Jun 18, 2015 at 9:30 pm

      Sabri S. writes: “GET OUT OF THE MIDDLE EAST AND MUSLIM LANDS AMERICA!!!”

      This is a mistaken view.

      In fact, those lands need to be returned to those from whom they were forcibly taken.

      This would result in a great improvement in the happiness and liberty of hundreds of millions of good people.

      The people of Christian/Judaic/Hellenic cultural origin are the rightful possessors of most of the Middle East.

      Islam has no rightful claim over the Middle East.

      • TheBuffster says

        Jun 20, 2015 at 8:57 pm

        As a totalitarian ideology that does not respect the rights of all individuals to freedom of thought, speech, press, worship – the right to one’s life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, free from the initiation of force and from fraud – Islam is an illegitimate form of religion and governance and has no rightful claim over anything.

        If Muslims want to throw away their time prostrating themselves to Allah five times a day and performing the other 3 bogus pillars of Islam (I don’t consider giving aid to the needy to be bogus), that’s their business. But when they want to emulate Mohammad in anything else – child marriage, the mistreatment of women, jihad, etc. – those who do so become as big a menace to humanity as any totalitarian movement ever has been. Such movements recognize no inalienable rights of individuals and thus, in justice, forfeit their own.

        Prodos is right. Islam as a political force is completely illegitimate, and as such it has no right to rule the Middle East or any other place on earth.

    • gravenimage says

      Jun 20, 2015 at 7:26 pm

      The appalling Sabri S. wrote:

      …and exactly what is the point of this imaginary drivel and nonsense.
      for a bunch of bigots and disrespect ful islamophobes, you sure enjoy
      interfering in other people’s lives…
      ……………………….

      What Muslim supremacist Sabri S. means is that any attempt at resisting a Muslim takeover and imposition of brutal Shari’ah law is to be seen as “interfering in other people’s lives”.

      And why not? Pious Muslims believe that our trying to continue to live free lives is “bigoted” and “Islamophobic”, and that we should be allowed to do nothing to “interfere” with our own subjugation under Islam.

      And given Sabri S.’s frequent lauding of the sanguinary Islamic State, we know *exactly* what that would look like: the use of Infidel women as sex slaves, the genocide of non-Muslims, and the beheading of anyone who voiced an issue with this horrific vision.

      • TheBuffster says

        Jun 20, 2015 at 8:35 pm

        Once again, Graven nails it!

        • gravenimage says

          Jun 20, 2015 at 11:10 pm

          Thank you, Buffster.

  11. Buraq says

    Jun 18, 2015 at 5:09 am

    The clown, Sabri wrote: ‘…. you sure enjoy interfering in other people’s lives …’

    Islam started in the deserts of Saudi Arabia. Now, it’s all over the world. How do you think it spread so far, you clown? Interference in other people’s lives, of course. Islam’s teachings, doctrine, ideology and theology demand that the whole world becomes enslaved by it.

    Now, that’s interfering in other people’s lives!

    You’re a five-star, wire-wigged, baggy-trousered, red-nosed clown, Sabri!

  12. duh_swami says

    Jun 18, 2015 at 5:31 am

    Glad to see you posting again on JW, Hugh…I hope it will be a regular thing, your insights are valuable, they always have been…Thanks…

  13. vlparker says

    Jun 18, 2015 at 7:24 am

    Actually, in addition to all of option 3, I like option 2 up until the end of the first sentence. After that, not so much. I would implement option 2 by deporting all muslims who aren’t US citizens, closing all mosques that are preaching jihad and banning all immigration from muslim countries. I would make it very uncomfortable for muslims in the US who support jihad and sharia law.

    One of the major problems is the unwillingness of too many human beings to admit they were wrong. We see that in every aspect of life, from global warming to the socialism experiment in our major cities. Despite prima facie evidence that their pet projects are miserable failures, rather than correct their mistakes these people double down. The same can be said for the Middle East interventionists.

    Option 3 is a great plan, but I don’t see anyone in Washington with the intelligence to admit that is a winning strategy, much less have the gonads to implement it.

    • RonaldB says

      Jun 18, 2015 at 8:55 am

      vlparker,

      In a word, you say that you would bring in more emphasis on the knowledge that Islam has a directed, sophisticated and active plan to subvert the West from inside, and take over its institutions so as to implement sharia law.

      I agree. I think the chances of changing the minds of a significant number of Muslims is very small. The committed Muslims are not necessarily acting from ignorance: they are committed to Islam, and unlike the US, have studied and analyzed their enemy. They understand democracy and individual liberties, and have chosen to reject them.

      Therefore, the real battle is ourselves, to take steps to limit or eliminate the infiltration of Muslims into our society and institutions. Indeed, all immigration of Muslims should stop, including the Amadiyyas, who in fact have reinterpreted the Islamic canon to eliminate individual (though not jihad) violence. The Amaddiyas are MASSIVE enablers of aggressive Islam. An example is the fact that Abdus Salaam, an Amaddiya, actually instituted the Pakistani nuclear program, which provides a cover for systematic Pakistani subversion and covert warfare towards India.

      • vlparker says

        Jun 18, 2015 at 8:13 pm

        Well said. Unfortunately our stupid PC society will just continue down the path to suicide.

  14. Greg Hamilton says

    Jun 18, 2015 at 7:57 am

    Brilliant and totally true. Nothing else will destroy the hydra-headed monster of jihad except this approach. The is the great stone that will finally crush the Hydra and kill it.

    I love kuft. http://enjoytheconditionsofomar.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/i-love-kufr.html

  15. Paul says

    Jun 18, 2015 at 8:50 am

    Please ignore the trolls do not reply to any of their comments. Just read what they have to say and then maybe not.

  16. Blitz2b says

    Jun 18, 2015 at 8:54 am

    Sabri you are a class clown indeed.
    Why is it that Muslims hate truth? When Islam is exposed as the reason for all major conflicts worldwide, why do Muslims refuse to investigate the cause, rather than accusing the ones who bring this truth to them of bigotry?

    Think for yourself rather than using redundant terms like ” Islamophobes ” and “racist”, to silence thought provoking discussions on Islam.

    We all know the death of Islam is imminent, it’s only a matter of time …… Yes a matter of time before the ones in civilized societies making excuses for this backward ideology will be forced to admit the truth, that Islam contradicts basic human rights of freedom as it hopes to assert it’s authority over all.

    That which you call “drivel” is actually an awakening even within yourself when you secretly admit but outwardly deny.

  17. Alarmed Pig Farmer says

    Jun 18, 2015 at 9:01 am

    And little is said about what is in the Qur’an and Hadith; for the planners, such a discussion would only complicate matters, would make what they are doing seem even less plausible, would show up the egg on too many faces.

    Oh the satisfaction I felt reading this sentence, a fully accurate description of what’s going on, with the exception that there is no planning room and there are no planners. Instead of a centralized command center, we are left with the mistaken incoherent ramblings of the likes Bill O’Reilly and Laura Ingraham gave us on Geller a couple of weeks ago.

    My personal fear in life, my horror, is being sentenced by a judge to be strapped in a chair in a bare room where once every minute a hidden loudspeaker broadcasts a meme in a soothing erudite voice for me to hear, like it or not:

    Radical Islamist.
    Moderate Moslem.
    Bigoted xenophobic Islamophobe.
    Radical Islamist.
    Violent extremist.
    Moderate Moslem.
    Islamist.
    Radical Islamist.
    Moderate Moslem.

    In my nightmare dream, strapped in the chair, after a few days of this my eyes are rolling and I’m drooling from the corner of my mouth. Finally, I look like an Ivy League Moron sorta like Bill & Laura. But I’ve got some real bad facial twitches, and a bad case of Tourette Syndrome where I unexpectedly bark out such things “Die!” or “Watch out!” or “Oh my God no!” or “They’re coming!” or “They’re already here!”

    Eventually, in my dream, I’m put in a Gulfstream G650, in cuffs, for a long flight. Then I’m dropped off by DHS officials at the front gate of a prison on the coast of Libya. The DHS psychiatrist explains to the scowling guards what I did for a living before succumbing to Islamophobia. Then I go to sleep, at least I think I’m sleeping, cuz all of a sudden it got dark.

  18. Stendec says

    Jun 18, 2015 at 9:55 am

    As I started reading this piece, I assumed it was another excellent post by Robert Spencer, but the style was much different from his, while quite familiar. I thought to myself, “You know, this sounds a lot like Hugh Fitzgerald.” So I stopped reading to check the byline, and sure enough, it was The Master. Welcome back, sir!

    Islam is total war–absolutely everything is a weapon in the perpetual quest to enslave all of humanity, to destroy the fabric of current civilization, and to obliterate the memory of all that came before. The weapons of this war include knives, guns, chemicals, technology of every kind, immigration, our own laws, oil money, infiltration of our institutions, including academia and the news media, terror of every kind, and the written and spoken word, just to name a few. The war has many fronts:political, economic,informational, social, and cultural. The terms of resolution of the war are defined unambiguously and unalterably: unconditional surrender of the infidel world–every man, woman, and child–to Islamic rule.

    To succeed, our self defense must be on every one of these fronts–it must also be total. The guiding principle should be this: every act of aggression, no matter how small, by the Islamic Collective must result in a loss for Islam–a highly visible loss, which we must celebrate and broadcast openly and loudly, to hammer home to the Islamic world at large that Mohammed’s promise of their inevitable victory was a fraudulent one, coming from a fraud of a prophet–a morally degenerate, self-serving pirate from the 7th century..

    • Alarmed Pig Farmer says

      Jun 18, 2015 at 12:56 pm

      To succeed, our self defense must be on every one of these fronts…

      Right now, we are waging defense on exactly none of these fronts. However, in a flash of big news yesterday, announced candidate Donald Trump said that he would destroy the oil wells and pipelines operated by the New Caliphate. So that’s one of your fronts: oil money.

      Although, even in his refreshing and unprecedented announcement, Trump was talking only about oil facilities operated by the New Caliphate, and not about destroying oil production facilities in the other twenty or so oil producing countries in Dar Al-Islam.

      But, at least, at last, someone, even if just a candidate, has declared that he would mount a defense on a front. It goes without saying, though, that Trump supposedly has no chance because he is seen by the mainstream news entertainers and the RINO establishment brokers as extreme. So this one single peep about mounting a defense front may be the last we ever hear.

  19. TheBuffster says

    Jun 18, 2015 at 10:41 am

    Wow! That was BRILLIANT, Mr. Fitzgerald! You completely obliterated the bullseye with your oh-so-pointed arrows!

    This one gets Facebooked.

  20. Bommelben says

    Jun 18, 2015 at 10:50 am

    ISLAM: AN IDEOLOGY OF SWINDLERS AND SUCKERS

    You can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time, but if you can fool all the people all of the time then you are either a genius or a tyrant and probably both.1)

    Actually it is not one person who is fooling all of the people for more than 1300 years, but a relatively small group of his self-appointed scholars and spokesmen, often disagreeing among each other over minor details with a disastrous result for all of the people. Logically it seems impossible to be at the same time intelligent, honest and a true Muslim believer. This regards especially the professional Muslims like imams and ayatollahs of which the so called moderates are the biggest swindlers.

    It is clear who the victims of these crooks are: the majority of moderate and peaceful Muslims. Most Muslims simply don’t know what they believe (and probably don’t care, they just do what is described and willingly believe they are superior in spite of the almost daily confrontation with the opposite) and the professional swindlers will be the last to inform them correctly. All criticism, especially when it regards the “truth” as it is written in their “holy” books, are called insulting, because the professional Muslims are afraid of the truth about their faith. And of course a cartoon can be much more explicit than a written text, especially because the illiterates can understand it without the help of the professional swindlers.

    So if you want to diminish the influence of the Islam you must start with the professional Muslims, most of them sufficient intelligent to know better than to really believe themselves that the Koran should be the word of Allah. There are more than enough reasons to declare those imams “persona non grata” or undesirable immigrants. The main reason of course is their propagation of unacceptable values: divine approval of plunder when it is from infidels, inequality between men and women, not freedom of choice about religion, extreme intolerance towards other minorities like Jews and gays and dishonesty in their explanation of the Muslim ideology. A great advantage of this strategy is that it can be executed by using strictly human measures in accordance with our moral values: just send then back to where they (or their parents) came from, in stead of deporting millions as is deemed not impossible by Geert Wilders.

    It is clear that most Muslims will not be eager to admit that they have been fooled all their life, as it is apparently also very difficult for our political leaders to admit that Islam is not a religion and most certainly not a religion of peace. Just like an animal that has been used to its cage is reluctant to leave it when set free, so will the Muslims be when the opportunity presents itself to be free at last of the fetters of Islam. And of course nobody will hinder them to pray to Allah or God. But they will be free of the ridiculous and immoral rules set by Mohammed, which most of them did not know or obey in the first place. They will be grateful to be free at last and most certainly their and our children will be.

    1) Abraham Lincoln? with adaptation Ben

  21. awake says

    Jun 18, 2015 at 10:56 am

    This is a superb summary analysis of the problem of Islam. It is not just the essential strategy, it is the only sentient strategy, for Islam, in totality, is utterly irredeemable.

    Welcome Back, Hugh!

    • gravenimage says

      Jun 20, 2015 at 11:19 pm

      Thanks for the heads up about this article, Awake. I almost missed it.

  22. Alarmed Pig Farmer says

    Jun 18, 2015 at 11:03 am

    websites such as this one have had a considerable…

    … effect on a tiny number of people. Public discourse has devolved into a form of opinion programming, much of it done by news entertainers politicians (who are themselves news entertainers) on TV and in newspapers & magazines, but also in classrooms, bureaucracy offices, houses of worship and courtrooms.

    A formidable hydra-headed beast of a foe, each head always wagging it’s long forked tongue, and getting paid to do the wagging. As stated at the beginning of this essay is that the three war rooms, including the third, the good war room, are a fantasy. To make that reality is to secure media bandwidth, and I ain’t talking about electronic bandwidth pipe to carry binary zeros and ones, I’m talking about mental bandwidth, attention, in the mind of individual people.

  23. voegelinian says

    Jun 18, 2015 at 1:28 pm

    “The theme of the third imagined War Room is Division and Demoralization — of Muslims.”

    As commenter “vlparker” noted somewhere above, the scenarist neglected to stage a third D — for as we know, three’s a charm: Deportation.

    (Even if it’s a nettle that niggles when that commenter feels inexorably bound to qualify his robustness with the C word “deporting all muslims who aren’t US citizens” — as though any Muslim has ever actually become a citizen of any non-Muslim polity in any way other than by murderous and/or mendacious deception coupled with our colossally disastrous naiveté.)

    Imagine in the first months of 1941 America proceeding to configure its War Room against the German Nazis — while a few million German Nazis continued to reside inside the U.S. in various venues and institutions of ordinary social life (including not only menial jobs but also positions in police forces, firemen’s associations, legal profession, business, government positions, academic positions, our own intelligence services and military, power plants, arts & entertainment…). And that scenario doesn’t factor in how such an internal Trojan Camel enemy would have at its disposal various facets of 21st century technology rendering the paramilitary asymmetry that much more perilous. If even the Counter-Jihad Softies agreed those German Nazis in that scenario should be deported (or at least detained in armed camps), they have no rational refutation (though that never stopped them) of our even more dangerous reality of our metastasizing present.

    P.S.: Some confusion continues to disperse like clouds of musty incense about that aforementioned D word: Unless we have a reliable way to tell the difference between harmless Muslims and dangerous Muslims (assuming generously that the former category even exists) — an ability which Robert Spencer himself has noted many times we do not in fact enjoy — it would make little sense to aim for any partial deportation as an ultimate goal (though when innumerable Muslims continue to be plotting mass-murderous terror attacks with any number of WMDs or creative ways to inflict carnage we haven’t even yet imagined, deporting any number of them will help, in a sort of half-assed way, which one hopes would be the gateway to more and more as reason takes over from anxious PC MC-infected emotion).

    • voegelinian says

      Jun 18, 2015 at 1:31 pm

      “…as though any Muslim has ever actually become a citizen of any non-Muslim polity…”

      And, I might add, as though any Muslim citizen like the pixies and elves of Lucky Charms cereal becomes, ipso facto, magically moderate & delicious.

    • Angemon says

      Jun 18, 2015 at 2:13 pm

      voegelinian posted:

      “Unless we have a reliable way to tell the difference between harmless Muslims and dangerous Muslims (assuming generously that the former category even exists) — an ability which Robert Spencer himself has noted many times we do not in fact enjoy”

      Luckily (?) for us, you’re on the case and have it covered:

      http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/05/here-we-go-mcclatchy-suggests-limits-on-free-speech-after-texas-jihad-shooting/comment-page-2#comment-1233303

      “one hopes for the day, nonetheless, when profiling will be more rational, and granularize the physiognomic factor — not eliminate it, just fine-tune it; since we already know (cf., the 911 hijackers) that Muslim attackers can also try to blend in appearance-wise“

    • PRODOS says

      Jun 18, 2015 at 10:16 pm

      voegelinian advocates deportation of Muslims.

      I acknowledge the problem of differentiating Muslims who are genuinely harmless vs those who only seem to be and are Jihadists-in-waiting.

      Let’s take Australia for example. What I’m unclear about is which of the following types of Muslims would be deported under this proposal?

      1. Muslims who are not citizens (for instance, they’re on working visas)?
      2. Muslims who have migrated to Australia and become citizens?
      3. Children born of Muslim migrants?
      4. Grandchildren of Muslim migrants?
      5. Australian citizens who convert to Islam ?
      6. Non-Muslims who have married a Muslim?

      This isn’t a trick question. I’m simply trying to understand the proposal.

      Thanks.

      • voegelinian says

        Jun 19, 2015 at 1:52 am

        PROODOS,

        The idea is to try to make our society as safe as possible; the idea is not (as the FOPs — Friends of Philip Jihadski (Angemon, Mirren, Champ, graven, Wellington, et al. think) to try to win a sophistry argument and defend a toady high school clique. Just use your noodle about your questions — your educated guess is as good as mine. (Note: anyone who has married a Muslim is suspect; after we have deported all the Muslims we can round up, we’ll at the very least have better resources to keep extra surveillance on such strangely brain-damaged souls; etc.).

        • vlparker says

          Jun 19, 2015 at 9:06 am

          That’s because Philip Jihadski, Angemon, Mirren, Champ, graven, Wellington, et alia are blooking for real, practical solutions, not living in fantasy land. While there would, no doubt, be a lot of resistance to deporting muslims who aren’t citizens, there could be no objection on legal grounds. On the other hand, deporting all muslims would be a Constitutional nightmare.

          Sarc/ Perhaps we could learn how to do it from Adolph’s example.

        • Angemon says

          Jun 19, 2015 at 10:36 am

          vlparker posted:

          “That’s because Philip Jihadski, Angemon, Mirren, Champ, graven, Wellington, et alia are blooking for real, practical solutions, not living in fantasy land. While there would, no doubt, be a lot of resistance to deporting muslims who aren’t citizens, there could be no objection on legal grounds. On the other hand, deporting all muslims would be a Constitutional nightmare.”

          Exactly. Those who aren’t citizens or have dual citizenship can potentially be given the boot and become someone else’s problem. Those who only have one citizenship can’t. It’s that simple.

        • Angemon says

          Jun 19, 2015 at 10:30 am

          voegelinian posted:

          “The idea is to try to make our society as safe as possible; the idea is not (as the FOPs — Friends of Philip Jihadski (Angemon, Mirren, Champ, graven, Wellington, et al. think) to try to win a sophistry argument and defend a toady high school clique.”

          Ah, of course you couldn’t let a chance to lie about regulars here pass. Much better to make false claims about other people than answering questions directed at you, especially questions pertaining plausible and likely scenarios your “total deportation” idea would have to face. Appeal to emotions is a logical fallacy you’re no stranger to. Also, stop making statements regarding what I, or others, allegedly think. You’re not a mind reader and I never said anything remotely resembling your asinine claim, so retract your words.

          “ Just use your noodle about your questions — your educated guess is as good as mine.”

          Let’s see: you have an idea and whatever others guess about specific details of it is as good as your guesses. I guess that includes guesses made by the people you mentioned above. So here’s my guess: your idea is anti-constitutional and seditious in essence, and the nature behind has always been present, in one way or another, on totalitarian systems. It is also my educated guess that you can’t answer PRODO’s questions because it doesn’t really suit you to go into that kind of detail – all you’re interested in is having the semblance of an idea, the prospect of an easy solution to a difficult problem, so you can play the role of All-Might Guru of the Counter-Jihad Movement. That fits in your MO of poor judgment and unfair criticism of people like Robert Spencer, Raymond Ibrahim, etc.

        • PRODOS says

          Jun 19, 2015 at 10:55 am

          Replying to voegelinian …

          “The idea is to try to make our society as safe as possible …”

          Okay.

          “… your educated guess is as good as mine …”

          I don’t really have an educated guess at this point.

          There are some proposals for dealing with the Islam problem that I’m clear about in my thinking.

          Extensive deportation isn’t one of them.

          I’m not rejecting the proposal. It’s just that when I begin thinking it through lots of other questions come up.

          In contrast (for instance) …

          … a proposal to prohibit any funding of Mosques from countries that prohibit the building of Churches and Synagogues due to that country’s hostility to non-Muslims makes sense — is clear — to me, morally, politically, culturally, and security-wise.

          … a proposal to end all taxpayer funding of Multiculturalism makes sense to me and is clear to me.

          … a proposal to repeal so-called “hate speech” laws, such as s18c, ditto.

          … a proposal to investigate Halal certification and Sharia financing, ditto.

          And the proposals made by Hugh Fitzgerald all make sense to me.

          But I can’t get my head around the deportation idea.

          Perhaps I feel that until it’s defined in a more specific way, I can’t assess whether it might do more harm than good.

          For instance (and I’m not suggesting this is what you are proposing, I’m just concocting a “what if”): If politicians and bureaucrats were given the power to expel or confine someone based on their beliefs or sympathies (let’s say some people believed in Nazism) then. yes, today the can clear the land of Nazis.

          But tomorrow, with a change in government, they can use the same legal instruments to clear the land of free market proponents or of Jews or of Liberal Party voters.

          Anyway, thanks for your reply.

          I welcome comments and criticism.

        • voegelinian says

          Jun 19, 2015 at 11:36 am

          vlparker,

          Muslims are not really citizens of any non-Muslim polity — they only have managed to fool us into thinking (through our PC MC ignorance of Islam) they are. Secondly, you Softies always seem to forget what we were able to do to Japanese- (and a few German- and Italian-)American citizens during WW2. America didn’t become “Nazi” by dong that. The Supreme Court never ruled Internment to be un-Constitutional then, nor ever since.

        • Angemon says

          Jun 19, 2015 at 11:53 am

          voegelinian posted:

          “Secondly, you Softies always seem to forget what we were able to do to Japanese- (and a few German- and Italian-)American citizens during WW2. America didn’t become “Nazi” by dong that. The Supreme Court never ruled Internment to be un-Constitutional then, nor ever since.”

          Huh? Are you saying that sending some of the Japanese-American population into camps in America during wartime is somehow equivalent to your “total deportation” theory?

        • PRODOS says

          Jun 19, 2015 at 11:39 am

          vlparker wrote, regarding voegelinian’s deportation proposal:

          “… While there would, no doubt, be a lot of resistance to deporting muslims who aren’t citizens, there could be no objection on legal grounds. On the other hand, deporting all muslims would be a Constitutional nightmare.”

          The Constitutional issue is in fact one of my concerns with this proposal.

          The parliamentary and legal process would be long and awkward.
          And I don’t know under which law it would come.

          Many years ago, the Menzies government tried to ban the Communist Party of Australia.
          It didn’t have the authority to even try to ban, expel or confine Communists per se. Or Communist sympathisers.

          The CPA was to be banned, but its members, unless they were engaged in provable acts of treason could continue with their love of Communism.

          More to the point, however, the primary value of a Constitution is to limit the powers of government. For every power granted to the state, limitations need to be defined.

          Angemon wrote:

          “Those who aren’t citizens or have dual citizenship can potentially be given the boot and become someone else’s problem. Those who only have one citizenship can’t. It’s that simple.”

          Sure.

          However, if I understand voegelinian correctly, one of his concerns is: What about Muslims who seem “peaceful” but then go Jihad?

          My understanding is that Islam allows its followers to wait for the right moment to strike their personal terror into the hearts of whatever unbelievers are handy. Deception is a prominent feature of Islam.

          And Islam’s violent commands regarding the Kafir may not be activated by Abdul but may be activated by Abdul’s son.

          Is there something that the Law can do or should do about the Jihadist-in-waiting?

          Deportation proposal aside, I do think voegelinian’s concern — the problem he is seeking to solve — is one that needs addressing.

          I welcome comments and criticism.

        • Angemon says

          Jun 19, 2015 at 11:59 am

          PRODOS posted:

          “However, if I understand voegelinian correctly, one of his concerns is: What about Muslims who seem “peaceful” but then go Jihad?”

          Those are to be dealt with according to the existing laws – assuming a scenario where all muslims who could be be deported have been deported, I don’t see why the laws the laws regarding treason shouldn’t apply.

        • voegelinian says

          Jun 19, 2015 at 12:53 pm

          PROODOS

          “… your educated guess is as good as mine …”

          I don’t really have an educated guess at this point.

          Your post would indicate otherwise; you seemed to have plenty of educated guesses (and assumptions) about the situation of the problem moving you to be disinclined to support the deportation meme. I think the disagreement between our respective positions is not a matter of procedure, but a matter of our respective definitions of the nature of the problem. I see a protracted, metastasizing train wreck on fire. You seem to see a problem of a slow cultural/ideological incompatibility between Muslims and us. I see the slowly, but surely, devolving situation of Muslims mass-murdering us through innumerable terror plots using WMDs in the coming decades which we will not be able to have the luck to stop nor the ability to anticipate — terror plots for which Muslims will need innumerable diverse Muslims on the ground (assimilated into our society by subversion on their part, and naïve softness on our part) to plan and pull off. This horrible danger apparently is not foremost in your mind, else you would be supporting doing whatever it takes to prevent it.

          So again, your tentative proposals fit logically with the sanguine non-emergency you seem to perceive as the nature of the problem; and they may very well be useful (in their own circumspect way) even for my apparently drastically different perception of the nature of the problem:

          … a proposal to prohibit any funding of Mosques from countries that prohibit the building of Churches and Synagogues due to that country’s hostility to non-Muslims makes sense — is clear — to me, morally, politically, culturally, and security-wise.

          … a proposal to end all taxpayer funding of Multiculturalism makes sense to me and is clear to me.

          … a proposal to repeal so-called “hate speech” laws, such as s18c, ditto.

          … a proposal to investigate Halal certification and Sharia financing, ditto.

          “And the proposals made by Hugh Fitzgerald all make sense to me.”

          Again, they and your proposals make sense if one thinks the house is not on fire. Imagine a vast apartment building with 500 apartments. Imagine that innumerable tenants therein belong to a subculture whose credo advocates arson. The majority of those tenants appear nice and friendly and Just Wanna Have a Sandwich. Meanwhile, arsons in apartments are increasing and, to the discerning eye, it appears that many of these otherwise nice and friendly seeming non-arsonists who belong to this arsonist subculture have been prevaricating, evasive, ambivalently supportive of the arsons, or outright lying. After a while, there is a trail of evidence consisting of enough dots & data to conclude that a horrific fire to engulf the entire apartment complex – and/or a series of fires of greater magnitude than heretofore experienced throughout the complex — is being planned. After studying the various data – including the data of the credo itself and of the history of the subculture – rational analysts conclude that the Landlord/Tenant agreement allowing this subculture to reside in the apartment complex was a disastrous folly and that unless they were all evacuated, the complex would suffer horrific arson attacks in the future. Critics of this proposal said no, we can’t abrogate the Landlord/Tenant agreement, but what we can do is increase surveillance of the members of that subculture. Objections to this included the fact that this policy over time would only further exacerbate tensions with that community and make them more alienated and hostile rather than less, fostering more insecurity and necessitating the increased cost and other problems associated with a kind of “police state” presence in the apartment complex. Furthermore, advocates of expulsion noted that the ultimate goals of the subculture’s credo was destruction of the society (as other apartment complexes were suffering from the same problems, and some of them had been already utterly destroyed) – and that the problem of this danger was not stable, but rather escalating and spiraling out of control. Critics of total expulsion, it soon became clear, weren’t concerned about this metastasizing danger of arson (and the physical destruction and loss of life it entailed) much at all – they were more concerned about how members of this subculture seemed to disrespect the apartment culture, how they left their laundry out, how they were violating various apartment rules, how many of them were involved in various crimes (short of, and not including, any mention of arson and destruction and by extension mass murder). Critics also seemed more concerned about the ethics and legally propriety of unprecedented violation of the Landlord/Tenant agreement – which made sense, since it turns out they weren’t really concerned about this metastasizing danger of arson (and the physical destruction and loss of life it entailed) much at all, given that apparently they didn’t think it was a clear and present danger (one Member of the Apartment Board, Mr. Wellington, hastened to point out that “A living blueprint for arson is quite different than actual arson” – strangely neglecting to factor in the aforementioned “trail of evidence consisting of enough dots & data to conclude that a horrific fire to engulf the entire apartment complex – and/or a series of fires of greater magnitude than heretofore experienced throughout the complex — is being planned” as well as (to repeat myself) what advocates of explusion had been pointing out for years; to wit: “advocates of expulsion noted that the ultimate goals of the subculture’s credo was destruction of the society (as other apartment complexes were suffering from the same problems, and some of them had been already utterly destroyed) – and that the problem of this danger was not stable, but rather escalating and spiraling out of control.”

        • voegelinian says

          Jun 19, 2015 at 12:54 pm

          For the source of the paraphrased quote from Wellington, see (and scroll down for extended discussion): http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/06/that-imaginary-war-room#comments

        • PRODOS says

          Jun 19, 2015 at 10:28 pm

          Replying to voegelinian …

          = = =
          voegelinian “… your educated guess is as good as mine …”

          PRODOS: “I don’t really have an educated guess at this point.”

          voegelinian: Your post would indicate otherwise; you seemed to have plenty of educated guesses (and assumptions) about the situation of the problem moving you to be disinclined to support the deportation meme.
          = = = =

          True, I do have many assumptions and educated guesses (as well as theories, positions, and favoured proposals) about the Islam issue.

          But if I come across a seriously and sincerely presented proposal I’m unfamiliar with, I try to understand the proposal and what problem it seeks to solve. I try (sometimes) to put aside my assumptions and get into the author’s viewpoint: What does he mean? It sounds like he’s saying “X” … but he might mean “Y” … if he thinks “L”, does he also think “M”? … etc.

          voegelinian: “I think the disagreement between our respective positions is not a matter of procedure, but a matter of our respective definitions of the nature of the problem.”

          Good point.

          voegelinian: “I see a protracted, metastasizing train wreck on fire. You seem to see a problem of a slow cultural/ideological incompatibility between Muslims and us.”

          With the Muslim problem, I would say there is a slow-ish problem which can suddenly become a fast and massive problem once a critical mass is reached or when the targeted people seem sufficiently vulnerable.

          I think we agree that Islam is incompatible with a free society.

          We probably also agree that Islam ultimately advances through widespread brutality if and when it can.

          There’s 1400 years of Kafir experience to back that up. Not to mention that it’s clearly spelled out in the Koran and Hadith.

          voegelinian: “I see the slowly, but surely, devolving situation of Muslims mass-murdering us through innumerable terror plots using WMDs in the coming decades which we will not be able to have the luck to stop nor the ability to anticipate — terror plots for which Muslims will need innumerable diverse Muslims on the ground (assimilated into our society by subversion on their part, and naïve softness on our part) to plan and pull off.”

          That is not a far-fetched scenario.

          voegelinian:”This horrible danger apparently is not foremost in your mind, else you would be supporting doing whatever it takes to prevent it.”

          It is true that the Islam problem, although high on my list of concerns, is not at the very top of that list.

          For instance, higher on my list is the repeal of “anti hate speech” laws and the protection of free speech.

          voegelinian: “… your tentative proposals fit logically with the sanguine non-emergency you seem to perceive as the nature of the problem ….”

          Not sure if I’d put it that way.

          voegelinian: “Imagine a vast apartment building with 500 apartments. Imagine that innumerable tenants therein belong to a subculture whose credo advocates arson … advocates of expulsion noted that the ultimate goals of the subculture’s credo was destruction of the society … and that the problem of this danger was not stable, but rather escalating and spiraling out of control.”

          I think this is a very helpful scenario.

          There are plenty of examples where drastic action involving inconvenience, disruption, and even death of innocent or partly innocent people has been unavoidable.

          Say, for instance, it was discovered that a deadly virus or a plague had infected New Zealanders. What would Australia have to do, given we have a lot of New Zealanders coming here and living here? (And very nice people too, BTW.)

          In the case of Islam, I think it would be a mistake to not explore drastic possible solutions and to weigh up their effectiveness compared to other measures and to clarify in what circumstances they would be appropriate or not.

          Thanks for your thoughtful reply.

      • Godless says

        Jun 19, 2015 at 10:47 pm

        I am new to the comments section on JW and I am shocked that you people are so soft on Islam and Muslims. JW readers defending Muslims and brutally attacking the person who is advocating deportation. Absurd.

        • PRODOS says

          Jun 19, 2015 at 11:53 pm

          Godless posted:

          “I am shocked that you people are so soft on Islam and Muslims.”

          A wide range of viewpoints and perspectives are represented in the comments sections.

          There is much robust exchange, some of it friendly, some of it heated.

          Although I’m only an occasional commenter, I enjoy it all and learn a great deal from it.

          🙂

      • PRODOS says

        Jun 20, 2015 at 7:14 am

        Replying to Angemon …

        = = =

        PRODOS: “However, if I understand voegelinian correctly, one of his concerns is: What about Muslims who seem “peaceful” but then go Jihad?”

        Angemon: “Those are to be dealt with according to the existing laws – assuming a scenario where all muslims who could be be deported have been deported, I don’t see why the laws … regarding treason shouldn’t apply.”

        = = =

        Okay.

        I don’t know the fine points regarding the legal definition of treason, but I take from your suggestion that if someone is trying to harm a country like the USA or Australia, then there would be laws such as treason already in place that would deal with this.

        Then there are also all sorts of anti-terrorism laws.

        That’s something I need to research and understand better.

        Which raises another couple of questions that I’d like to put out there:

        Do we in fact already possess the laws needed to effectively deal with the Islam problem?

        Do we have such laws but are not applying them?

        Do we have them but also have other laws which thwart these laws and thereby stop them from being applied? For instance, anti discrimination laws — not wanting to be treated as “racist” — seemed to have prevented British police from stopping Muslims involved the sexual exploitation of non-Muslim girls.

        Thanks for any further thoughts.

        • Angemon says

          Jun 20, 2015 at 7:56 am

          PRODOS posted:

          “Which raises another couple of questions that I’d like to put out there:

          Do we in fact already possess the laws needed to effectively deal with the Islam problem?

          Do we have such laws but are not applying them?

          Do we have them but also have other laws which thwart these laws and thereby stop them from being applied? For instance, anti discrimination laws — not wanting to be treated as “racist” — seemed to have prevented British police from stopping Muslims involved the sexual exploitation of non-Muslim girls.”

          I believe that’s the case – the current existing laws in any given Western country should be more than enough to handle an ideology diametrically opposed to Western core values, if not for a few wrenches thrown into the gears: religion, cultural relativism, self-loathing, ignorance and political correctness.

        • PRODOS says

          Jun 21, 2015 at 12:08 pm

          Angemon wrote:

          “I believe that’s the case – the current existing laws in any given Western country should be more than enough to handle an ideology diametrically opposed to Western core values, if not for a few wrenches thrown into the gears: religion, cultural relativism, self-loathing, ignorance and political correctness.”

          I find this to be a very interesting and useful perspective.

          Thanks.

  24. Walter Sieruk says

    Jun 18, 2015 at 2:33 pm

    If there really is a “war room” where very serious conversations happen about what to do about the murderous violence of the different Islamic terror groups, such as ISIS, whose members engage in ruthless heartless and heinous deadly violence of the militant jihad. A good example of what to do may be subject of ISIS which may serve as a topic of interest.. That is the way to handle the vicious, malicious ,malice-filled and murderous fiends who compose the brutal and deadly jihad entity ISIS is by the use of many very strong powers of many strong powers of military might. As Thomas Jefferson had so well stated With every barbarous people…force is law.”

  25. Thomas Hennigan says

    Jun 18, 2015 at 3:17 pm

    I also think that initiatives could be taken to support Christian groups of various denominations who could beam cable TV programs into the muslim world, somewhat like what Fr. Zaccharis Botros is doing so that the muslims themselves could find some hope and the possibility of converting to Christianity.

  26. Champ says

    Jun 18, 2015 at 3:20 pm

    Hey the circus is coming to town, now that ‘Donald Trump’ is running for President!! …eyes roll @-@

    Well, I must admit that it would be *great* to hear him say, “You’re fired!!!”, to obama!

    And in my own “Imaginary War Room” I imagine Donald Trump ‘firing’ a whole lotta other folks, too! …for sure it’s fun to imagine 🙂

  27. Edward says

    Jun 18, 2015 at 9:35 pm

    Walter Sieruk says June 18, 2015 at 2:33 pm

    “As Thomas Jefferson had so well stated with every barbarous people…force is law.”

    I tried that approach in the early 90’s, but I was defeated. What can a 5’4” guy do to an 8′ 1/2 or so giant. This errant individual was hell bent into scaring my wife out of her ownership interest of a small business.

    This encounter with this nemesis lasted at least 6 months. Asking for help from the cops didn’t work….”they would come only if someone had gotten hurt.” I made my mind that I wanted to get rid of him; not by killing him though. In my mind I tried similar tactics of the scenarios mentioned in this essay to quell the danger to my family. Domesticating, appeasing and by paying him off didn’t work. We did know much of him…only that he had a daughter. Surprisingly, that daughter was the portal that helps me to know all about him. My wife eventually hired this young girl to stock my wife’s inventory…BTW my wife ran a thrift store. The daily store operations ran without any unexpected challenges, at least not from her dad for a while.

    However, we never let our guard down though…..for I got myself a permit to carry a concealed gun. I carried a small weapon as a deterrent, but carrying that gun manifested in a very unusual way…..it attracted the same person to act unreasonably again. The gun didn’t deter him in any way…..my encounters with him got worse.

    The fact that I didn’t know much about him made things less manageable. But that all changed when I found out that he practiced “Satanism.” This revelation was important, but this did not help me quickly in any way for nobody would venture to help me for some time. I guess people don’t believe in it or afraid to meddle in such practices.

    About the end of the 5th month of struggling with this character there came a break- through to help ease this pesky turmoil. This lady who had cut my families and my hair as well….she quickly recognized that I was somewhat downtrodden that day when I visited her shop. I guess she had seen the gun when I stepped up onto the barber’s chair…she firmly asked me if I had been having problems from some unfriendly people. I answered yes. She immediately stopped clipping my hair and went directly to a closed cabinet….at that moment my concern was that she was in the verge of whipping out her own gun.

    That wasn’t the case, for Sally (the lady barber) wanted me to know the “Good News” of what was written in the Holy Bible. She thumbed through the bible nimbly before she had gotten to God’s armory depiction; where it’s written of His weapon of choice, Ephesians 6:10-18 God’s Suit of Armor.

    Its metaphor of donning His Armor is not an easy read, but His armor protection manifests in due time. I spent about 2 days immersing myself in its purpose that has helped me 100%. For in the 3rd day this enemy of mine had a mindset erasure…..better said a mind changing experience. Seeing this individual cowering and trying to hide behind a phone both made me very sorry for his condition. After the 4th day this poor soul and his daughter faded like the morning fog and never to be seen again. This event happened over 25 years ago and has helped me through other minor short-lived encounters without flexing a muscle or firing a gun. The introduction and my devotion to Ephesians 6 has being ongoing since then and has helped in our daily lives challenges! Perhaps we should engage in finding its potential to fight against any invader of our American culture. Ephesians 6:12 reveals who is our real enemy!

    “For it is not against human enemies that we have to struggle, but against the principalities and the ruling forces who are masters of the darkness in this world, the spirits of evil in the heavens.”

    There must be an unhidden factor that is not publicized or believed in; that about the existence of spiritual warfare. Disturbed minds seem to be inflicted to those that cause the horrific atrocities we hear or see in the ME. Thinking out of the boundaries… perhaps, black magic practices may promote these crimes as well. More @: http://blackmagicworld.com/black-magic-in-muslim-countries.html

    Note: Pope Francis has given homilies about it, but with very emphasizes. One can find more about it on the web also.

    A side note: Hugh Fitzgerald’s ‘That Imaginary War Room is a keeper

    • Edward says

      Jun 18, 2015 at 9:44 pm

      Ooops! typo error: Pope Francis has given homilies about it, but with very [ little ] emphasizes. Sorry about that.

  28. PRODOS says

    Jun 18, 2015 at 10:37 pm

    An outstanding article by Hugh Fitzgerald. Very well reasoned. Thank you.

  29. dlbrand says

    Jun 19, 2015 at 12:53 am

    Of the delineated “War rooms”, FITZGERALD posed:

    Of the three, which do you favor?

    Do you think constant military intervention, and especially the wars in Iraq, and in Afghanistan, and the overthrow of Qaddafi in Libya, have been a wise use of Western resources? Is Islam weaker as a result?

    Has the West been made more secure? And is the Muslim presence in the West smaller or larger, and growing?

    Excellent questions; Candidates, please answer them.

    • BillWalker says

      Jun 20, 2015 at 1:53 am

      Send / Cheney to the trouble spots. Problem solved.

  30. vlparker says

    Jun 19, 2015 at 12:20 pm

    @ voegelinian

    voefelinian says: Muslims are not really citizens of any non-Muslim polity — they only have managed to fool us into thinking (through our PC MC ignorance of Islam) they are.

    As soon as you have SCOTUS convinced of that let me know.

    • voegelinian says

      Jun 20, 2015 at 12:49 am

      Yeah, the Counter-Jihad will be able to push this meme effectively, with all this needless irrational flack against it which fucks like you put up.

      • gravenimage says

        Jun 20, 2015 at 6:57 pm

        Voegelinian, there is no excuse for referring to long-time Jihad Watch poster vlparker or any other Anti-Jihadist here as “fucks”. This is all the more appalling because it is not clear from his post that he even disagrees with you.

        In any case, this sneering and abuse is *no* way to get your points across to people you might consider your colleagues here.

        And Philip Jihadski, crudely referring in turn to Voegelinian as a “sex donkey” is no more useful.

        I doubt my comments will be appreciated by either principle, of course. You both have a lot to contribute here at Jihad Watch, but I don’t believe, sadly, that the above posts do much to reflect that.

        • TheBuffster says

          Jun 20, 2015 at 8:32 pm

          Thank you for that most sensible and civil post, Graven.

        • voegelinian says

          Jun 21, 2015 at 12:57 pm

          lol, gravenimage who has ignored hundreds of abusive, belligerent, fulminating inveective against me from Philip Jihadski over the yhears, and has ignored the numbingly repetitive attacks of rabbit-hole sophistry against my hard stance on the problem of Islam from Angemon, suddenly pops up to scold me — indicating that she does in fact pay attention to the comments and that she has been pretending not to notice the aforementioned egregious hostility against the hard stance against Muslims which so offends Philip Jihadski and Angemon’s that they must dog me like terriers with a bone.

        • Angemon says

          Jun 21, 2015 at 3:46 pm

          voegelinian posted:

          “lol, gravenimage who has ignored hundreds of abusive, belligerent, fulminating inveective against me from Philip Jihadski over the yhears”

          That is demonstrably false – GI has, on several occasions, interceded in your behalf with PJ. You know it, she knows it, and you know she knows you know, so why the farce? All you’re going to get with that kind of blatant lies is to have more regulars against you.

          “which so offends Philip Jihadski and Angemon’s that they must dog me like terriers with a bone.”

          Says the guy who keeps bringing us up and lying about us. Also, Jihad Watch is a public forum – there’s no need to “dog” you when you post comments publicly, is it? Of course, you always have to play the victim, like a good muslim – that’s all you have in lieu of fact-based discussion of your ideas.

        • gravenimage says

          Jun 21, 2015 at 3:22 pm

          I am not “scolding” you, Voegelinian—I just don’t believe that your being abusive to other Counter Jihadists is at all useful in your conveying your points.

          I don’t find abusiveness in any other poster appropriate, either.

          And I am at a loss—as I’ve said before—that you appear to think that I follow every post here at Jihad Watch, and that if I do not comment in turn, it is out of some sort of deliberate perversity.

          Not only do I miss many comments, but I don’t always have time to read every story. Would that it were otherwise.

        • Angemon says

          Jun 21, 2015 at 3:52 pm

          gravenimage posted:

          “I am not “scolding” you, Voegelinian—I just don’t believe that your being abusive to other Counter Jihadists is at all useful in your conveying your points.”

          Notice that you applied the same standard to both him and PJ, but voeg has the gall to lie and say you “popped up” to “scold” him – it’s not that he deserved the “scolding” for using a similar language to the one you asked PJ to abstain from, it’s that you only “popped up” to “scold” him. He feels that what he did was righteous and called for, and shame on you for saying something, even though he complains about the times you didn’t.

  31. gravenimage says

    Jun 20, 2015 at 6:40 pm

    Brilliant stuff from the incomparable Hugh Fitzgerald—so good to see him contributing to Jihad Watch again!

    I, too, would relish being party to—or even just an observer of—that Third War Room.

    Just a couple of small points:

    Social failures: the War Room will promote discussion of how women are mistreated in Islam, how minorities are treated, and why these reflect the teachings of Islam, clearly misogynistic and clearly uninterested in the position of non-Muslim minorities. Moral failures: vide the Islamic State. Or see how both sides treat the other side in Syria or Libya or Yemen or Iraq. This is what that War Room should be publicizing, talking about, forcing Muslims to talk about.
    ………………………………….

    Pious Muslims, of course, do not consider these to be failures of Islam at all—instead, they consider misogyny and the oppression of Infidels, rightly, to be core tenets of Islam.

    And—minor point—it is not entirely accurate to say that Islam is “uninterested in the position of non-Muslim minorities”—instead, it places the position of Infidels squarely under the Muslim heel as oppressed and abused dhimmis.

    The reason we should pressure Muslims to talk about these issues is so that they can no longer spew Taqiyya about how all of these iniquities are “un-Islamic”. Their fooling the hopeful Kuffar is one of the main things that prevents us from dealing with Islam in a clear-eye manner.

    More:

    The Islamic basis for Muslim failure is now much more widely understood among non-Muslims; websites such as this one have had a considerable role in forcing this understanding. But the trick is to force Muslims to understand the sources of their own unhappinesses of so many different kinds.
    ………………………………….

    More Infidels are indeed clued in—but large numbers are still in deep denial—perhaps even more so than previously, as that denial need necessarily become more willful all the time, given the vast and mounting evidence to the contrary. We still, alas, have a great deal more work to do on educating Infidels—especially our frequently clueless “leaders”—on the Jihad threat.

    As for Muslims understanding the source of their own failure, I believe that with the widespread Islamization of both the Muslim world and many parts of Dar-al-Harb that we are farther from this than ever.

    But we have beaten back Islam before—at Poitiers, at Lepanto, at the Gates of Vienna, on the Barbary Coast, and more recently in the Horn of Africa with virtually ending Somali piracy there; as well as reclaiming ground lost to Islam in Spain, Portugal, southern France, southern Italy, Sicily, Greece, the Balkans, and Israel—and each time this did not necessitate any sort of reform by Muslims themselves. I’m not sure, indeed, that this is anything we should count on.

    More:

    Look at Al-Sisi. Do you not sense in him someone who knows that Islam has to be modified, or re-interpreted, or if nothing else will work, ruthlessly constrained, as he is doing with the True Believers the Muslim Brotherhood? For Al-Sisi is afraid of the effect of too much Islam, taken straight up, on the minds of True Believers.
    ………………………………….

    I believe the very best we can hope for from Al-Sisi is an Attatürk redux—a quashing of some of the domestic aspects of Islam, while still allowing pious Muslims to abuse and threaten Infidels, particularly the Copts. Under Attatürk, it is to be noted, the Armenian Genocide—including the horrific destruction of Smyrna in 1922—continued apace with virtually no interference from above.

    And there are reasons that Al-Sisi, even assuming he had the same aims as Attatürk, is apt to be less successful—most notably, that Turkey a century ago was reeling from the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire, the last Caliphate, whereas now Islam is resurgent almost everywhere, including in Egypt itself.

    I am heartened to have Al-Sisi in Egypt rather than the Muslim Brotherhood, but I would very much stop short of considering him any sort of actual reformer of Islam itself.

    More:

    Would that in the Pentagon and the White House there were more who have come to the conclusion that Islam itself, with its amazing power over the minds of men, is the problem. Then imagine a thousand articles commissioned by that War Room from authorities in different fields: economists would write about the lack of major innovation in Islamic world, political scientists would write about the persistence of despotism in the Islamic world, sociologists would study the comparative treatment of women, and the position of minorities; psychologists would write about the moral insensitivity of Muslims to the suffering of their enemies (see those Yazidi women). This would create an atmosphere — call it demoralization — that could force Muslims to admit that something was wrong…
    ………………………………….

    Again, I believe that *very few* Muslims will actually admit that something is wrong with Islam itself—but the above scenario would likely force more Muslims to drop the mask and admit that they actually embrace these Islamic horrors themselves, and that would be worth a great deal itself.

    Despite my few cavils here, I am, as I said, thrilled to see the return of the erudite Hugh Fitzgerald here, and hope that this fine article is to be the first of many, many more in the future.

    • TheBuffster says

      Jun 20, 2015 at 8:29 pm

      An excellent post, Graven!

    • PRODOS says

      Jun 21, 2015 at 11:54 am

      Very helpful comments gravenimage. Thanks.

    • gravenimage says

      Jun 21, 2015 at 3:33 pm

      Thank you. Buffster and PRODOS.

FacebookYoutubeTwitterLog in

Subscribe to the Jihad Watch Daily Digest

You will receive a daily mailing containing links to the stories posted at Jihad Watch in the last 24 hours.
Enter your email address to subscribe.

Please wait...

Thank you for signing up!
If you are forwarding to a friend, please remove the unsubscribe buttons first, as they my accidentally click it.

Subscribe to all Jihad Watch posts

You will receive immediate notification.
Enter your email address to subscribe.
Note: This may be up to 15 emails a day.

Donate to JihadWatch
FrontPage Mag

Search Site

Translate

The Team

Robert Spencer in FrontPageMag
Robert Spencer in PJ Media

Articles at Jihad Watch by
Robert Spencer
Hugh Fitzgerald
Christine Douglass-Williams
Andrew Harrod
Jamie Glazov
Daniel Greenfield

Contact Us

Terror Attacks Since 9/11

Archives

  • 2020
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2019
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2018
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2017
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2016
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2015
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2014
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2013
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2012
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2011
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2010
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2009
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2008
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2007
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2006
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2005
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2004
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2003
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • March

All Categories

You Might Like

Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Recent Comments

  • janicevanguilder on New study reveals that Muslim religiosity strongly linked to hatred towards the West
  • Boycott Turkey on Greece, Cyprus, Egypt, France and UAE conduct joint military exercises amid rising Turkish threat
  • Yogi on EU Parliament members call for firing of border agency director for preventing illegal migrants from entering Europe
  • Hoi Polloi on Why so many Muslims can’t wait for Biden to get inaugurated
  • Hoi Polloi on EU Parliament members call for firing of border agency director for preventing illegal migrants from entering Europe

Popular Categories

dhimmitude Sharia Jihad in the U.S ISIS / Islamic State / ISIL Iran Free Speech

Robert Spencer FaceBook Page

Robert Spencer Twitter

Robert Spencer twitter

Robert Spencer YouTube Channel

Books by Robert Spencer

Jihad Watch® is a registered trademark of Robert Spencer in the United States and/or other countries - Site Developed and Managed by Free Speech Defense

Content copyright Jihad Watch, Jihad Watch claims no credit for any images posted on this site unless otherwise noted. Images on this blog are copyright to their respective owners. If there is an image appearing on this blog that belongs to you and you do not wish for it appear on this site, please E-mail with a link to said image and it will be promptly removed.

Our mailing address is: David Horowitz Freedom Center, P.O. Box 55089, Sherman Oaks, CA 91499-1964

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.