More than 14 years have passed since Americans have had their attention forcefully fixed on the reality of Islamic terrorism. Until September 11, 2001, with the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, most people in America — and in Europe — could be forgiven for assuming that they would not become the targets of Arab – and Muslim – terror attacks. That was something for Israelis to worry about. And if they had not been guilty of what the Arabs saw as “occupation of Arab lands” (for decades the mantra justifying terrorist attacks on Israel), why should they be targeted?
That comforting assumption evanesced in the face of more attacks by Muslims on targets all over Europe: in Amsterdam, Theo van Gogh was killed for the crime of making Submission, a movie about Muslim women. In 2004 in Madrid, at Atocha Station, in the same year, Muslim bombs claimed Spanish victims, though Spain’s government had taken a largely pro-Arab line; in London, in 2005, innocents on both busses and the Underground were the victims of Muslim attacks, apparently because British troops were in Iraq and Afghanistan. In France, there have been murderous attacks on French Jews, not Israelis, including the attack on the Hyper Cacher, a kosher market. And there have been attacks on cartoonists, of various nationalities, who dared to mock Muhammad – the Charlie Hebdo staff in Paris was massacred, and in Denmark attempts – fortunately unsuccessful — were made on the life of Lars Vilks. In both cases the putative crime was “blasphemy.”
Not everyone was prepared to surrender: in the United States, Pamela Geller helped to organize a Draw-Muhammad contest in Texas, and for her pains now finds it necessary to be accompanied at all times by security guards. Indeed, one could fill up pages merely listing Muslim attacks either planned or carried out within Europe and North America; still other pages would be needed to list all the Muslim attacks on non-Muslim targets in such varied places as Mumbai, Beijing, and Bali. Clearly something larger than that Arab anger over Israeli “occupation” explains these worldwide attacks.
As more and more people in the West are beginning to realize, the “root cause” of all this violence by Muslims against non-Muslims is to be sought not in a local grievance, but in the ideology of Islam itself. The personal testimony of ex-Muslims such as Ibn Warraq and Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Ali Sina and Wafa Sultan, the analyses provided by Western students of Islam such as Robert Spencer and Bat Ye’or, have had their slow and steady effect. This small army of truth-tellers dissects the contents of the Qur’an and Sunnah (which consists, in written form, of both the Hadith and Sira), and for this have been described as “bigots,” but it becomes harder and harder to ignore or refute their evidence.
Among the learned analysts determined not to listen either to the apostates or to such people as Spencer, one comes immediately to mind. John Esposito, who created the Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, associated with Georgetown, can be counted on to ignore the contents of Islam and to serve as an apologist. Alwaleed bin Talal, a Saudi prince, is now that Center’s main funder, and the Center itself was renamed the Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding. Esposito has a long record of managing to find ways to ignore or dismiss the textual evidence that Spencer, Ibn Warraq, and others adduce from Qur’an and Hadith.
But money alone does not explain why so many people in the West have been so ready to ignore the evidence of Muslim malevolence, of widespread support for violent Jihad. Many In the West simply don’t want to see what is staring them in the face. For if Islam really does inculcate permanent hostility toward Infidels, what, then, is to be done about the tens of millions of Muslims already ensconced in Western lands? Could it really be that, as suggested by some, the adherents of Islam see the world as uncompromisingly divided between Dar al-Islam, the lands where Islam dominates and Muslims rule, and Dar al-Harb, the Domain of War, that part of the world which has not yet come under the sway of Islam and rule by Muslims? Could it really be that it is incumbent upon Muslims to wage Jihad, that is, the “struggle” to ensure that the whole world ultimately comes under the sway of Islam, so that Muslims rule everywhere? Even if that goal sounds fantastic to Infidels, there are enough Muslims, it seems, among the more than 1.2 billion in the world, who apparently do not agree, and are willing to keep trying. And the more their numbers increase inside Dar al-Harb, the greater the threat they pose.
Could it really be, after all, that Israel was only one target of Muslim aggression among many, in a much larger war, first to regain all the territories once in Muslim possession (Israel, Spain, the Balkans, Sicily) and then, after those re-conquests, to fulfill the duty to work to spread Islam until it everywhere dominated? And why did this explosion of violence begin not 50 or 100 years ago, but just in the last two decades?
A Saudi cleric, Dr. Nasser bin Suleiman Al-‘Omar, noted on Al-Jazeera TV on April 19, 2006:
The Islamic nation now faces a great phase of Jihad, unlike anything we knew fifty years ago. Fifty years ago, Jihad was attributed only to a few individuals in Palestine, and in some other Muslim areas.
How do things stand now, in 2015? The doctrine of Jihad wasn’t suddenly invented in the past fifty years. It’s been the same, more or less, for 1350 years. It had fallen into desuetude when Muslims felt themselves to be weak, but did not, and could not, disappear. What happened to make things so very different in recent decades? Some might point to the end of “colonialism.” They might note, for example, that the French, after forty years in Morocco and Tunisia, had withdrawn from both by the mid-1950s, and from Algeria in 1962. They might note that the British garrisons in Aden and elsewhere along the Persian Gulf had been withdrawn, largely for financial reasons, and that Saudi Arabia itself had never been subject to colonial rule. They might note the withdrawal of the British from India, and the creation of an Islam-centered state, in what was then West Pakistan (now Pakistan) and East Pakistan (now Bangladesh). The Dutch abandoned their rule over Muslims in the East Indies (what is now Indonesia). But the end of colonial rule over Muslim peoples, more than a half-century ago, is not enough to explain the current violence and threats by Muslims worldwide.
Three developments explain the explosion of Islamic aggression in the last two decades, developments which permitted the Jihad to widen in scope and no longer be merely a small-scale Lesser Jihad against Israel:
1) First, there is the money weapon provided by the OPEC oil bonanza. Inshallah-fatalism and hatred of innovation (bida)—both tend to hinder economic development in Arab and Muslim countries. You are likely to put in less effort if, in the end, Allah decides the outcome. And Muslim distrust of innovation dampens the desire of individuals to jettison age-old methods and to introduce new ways of manufacturing and distribution. Muslim Arabs have acquired fantastic sums, nonetheless, because such acquisition required no effort on their part – it merely reflects an accident of geology. Since 1973, Arab and other Muslim-dominated oil states have received close to 25 trillion dollars from the sale of oil and gas to oil-consuming nations. This constitutes the greatest transfer of wealth in human history. The Muslim recipients did nothing to deserve this. Many interpreted the oil bonanza as a deliberate sign of Allah’s beneficence, inshallah-fatalism in their favor. That money did not just save them from poverty, but made many of them fabulously wealthy. And the higher prices that the OPEC cartel for a while managed to exact could even be interpreted as a kind of Jizyah, exacted from the Infidels.
What have the Arabs done with that twenty-five trillion dollars in OPEC money that they received over the past one-third century? They did not create paradises of artistic and scientific creation. Their peoples continue to rely on armies of wage-slaves to do the real work; in Qatar, for example, one-tenth of the population, the native Qataris, are serviced by foreign workers, Arab and non-Arab, who make up the remaining nine-tenths. Arab oil states have bought hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of Western arms. And this has created a network of middlemen, bribes-givers and bribes-takers, and Western hirelings involved not only in arms sales, but also in the business of supplying other goods and services to these suddenly rich oil states. And these people not unnaturally find ways to explain away or divert attention from the less pleasant aspects of the countries with which they are involved. Saudi Arabia, for example, has long enjoyed the support of powerful Western business interests for whom Saudi Arabia is a major client; these interests have a stake in continued good relations and are not about to let unpleasant truths (such as the hatred of Infidels found in Saudi schoolbooks) get too much attention. Thus has the oil money become the fabled “wealth” weapon of the Jihad, by which boycotts, and bribery, and the dangling of profitable contracts, contributed to creating a vast and loyal constituency among some influential and meretricious people in the capitals of the West.
How else have the Arabs spent that oil money? As mentioned above, on wage-slaves, those foreigners who, in Saudi or Qatar or the Emirates, arrive to do all the work. On palaces for the corrupt ruling families and their corrupt courtiers. On foreign real estate at the highest end, and luxury goods. It’s not only the ruling families who help themselves to the oil wealth – there’s so much to go around. Play your cards right and you could share that wealth, even if you are not a prince, princeling, or princelette of the Al-Saud family, but merely a lowly commoner. The original Bin Laden, founder of the clan, arrived in Saudi from Yemen, became a successful contractor, even won contracts for building in Mecca, and become fabulously rich. Courtiers such as the commoner Adnan Khashoggi began as a middleman in arms deals and made a fortune. Many started out as such fixers and middlemen in the Arab Gulf states and Saudi Arabia, and then metamorphosed into legitimate businessmen.
This creates a class of people who profit from, and support the regime. In the same way, the rich Arabs have created a lobby of Westerners, who divert attention from Islam’s tenets and teachings. The highly profitable contracts that have been given to Western businessmen for the construction of office parks, hospitals, apartment complexes, military cities have created a natural lobby in the West for Arabs and Muslims, consisting not only of those who receive such contracts, but also of others, including Western public relations experts, former government officials, journalists, academics, whose services are made available to the rich Arabs in presenting their case. Such institutions as the Center for Contemporary Arab Studies, or, again, John Esposito’s Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, both in Washington and in England, such as the Arab Studies programs at Durham and Exeter and many departments of Islamic studies or Middle Eastern history, have been staffed by apologists for Islam. Columbia University offers a particularly egregious example.
Another product of the “wealth” Jihad are the thousands of mosques that Arab oil money pays for, in London and Rome and Paris, as in Niger and Pakistan and Indonesia. Much of that money comes from Saudi Arabia, whose clerics make sure that the mosques that are built, or that receive Saudi support, preach the stern Wahhabi version of Islam. It is the same for madrasas that receive Saudi subventions. And campaigns of Da’wa (the Call to Islam, particularly effective in Western prisons), too, often receive OPEC money.
2) The second development, observable at the same time as the oil money really began to flow into the countries of Western Europe, was demographic: millions of Muslim migrants have over the past four decades been allowed to enter Western Europe. These were mainly Pakistanis in England, Turks in Germany, Algerians in France, Moroccans in Spain, Indonesians in Holland, and in every country, assorted mix-‘n-match Muslims from all of these and still other places. They brought their wives; their families always became much larger than those of the non-Muslim natives. These Muslims could now enjoy Western medicine (lower rates of infant mortality), Western education, Western housing — free or greatly subsidized.
What Muslims brought undeclared in their mental baggage to the West –Islam itself — was not held up for close examination. And it was taken as an article of faith that nothing seriously prevented Muslims from integrating with the same ease as non-Muslim immigrants. Those who expressed doubts about this, who suggested that there might be special problems with Muslim immigrants — and these skeptics included both some who had been raised as Muslims (Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Ibn Warraq) and non-Muslims (Bat Ye’or, Hans Jansen, Robert Spencer) who had studied Islam — were at first dismissed as bigots. But they could not be silenced. These informed commentators insisted that the belief-system of Islam, the system that suffuses the minds of Muslims wherever they are, has taught them to be hostile to Infidels, and should not be ignored. But many non-Muslims, at a loss as to what they might do with this knowledge, have willfully ignored Islamic doctrine. The notions that first, a Muslim’s true loyalty is to fellow members of the umma al-islamiyya, and second, that Jihad to spread Islam (so that ultimately Islam will everywhere dominate) is a duty incumbent on all Muslims, have not been taken seriously by those whose duty it is to protect and instruct us.
In recent years, an older generation of Western scholars of Islam and the Middle East has died or retired (one thinks of Bernard Lewis, A.K.S. Lambton, J. B. Kelly, Elie Kedourie, P. J. Vatikiotis); these people were critical both of Islam and of its apologists in the West. They have been replaced, in academic departments, by those who are often Muslims themselves or, if not Muslim, less critical, and more admiring of both. Their background and training were received from Arabists, and they were inclined to be apologists for Islam. Ibn Warraq once said that in his experience, many of those who choose to enter the fields of Islam and Middle Eastern history possess a pre-existing animus toward Jews, or toward the West itself, and are predisposed to find Islam attractive. He calls this “self-selection.” And then there is still sympathy for peoples from the “Third World” — never mind that Qataris, Kuwaitis, Saudis, Emiratis hardly qualify, given their fabulous unearned wealth.
The flow of Muslims into Europe has consisted mainly of Pakistanis to Great Britain, Moroccans and Turks to the Netherlands, Algerians and other maghrebins to France, Turks to Germany, Egyptians and Libyans to Italy. In 2015, they are now joined by Syrians (or “Syrians,” since many so identified in fact come from elsewhere), who are being admitted in huge numbers. They will swell Muslim millions already in the West. More than 800,000 of these “Syrians” are set to be received by Germany alone this year, thanks to Angela Merkel.
Demography is destiny. The greater the number of Muslims in Europe, the greater their political power becomes. Muslims have been attempting, unsurprisingly, to limit the ability of non-Muslims in Europe to enforce laws, or to enjoy freedoms, or to fashion foreign policies, to which Muslims might object. Think of the difficulties the French government still experiences in enforcing the no-hijab rule in state schools; think of the cartoonists in France and Denmark and elsewhere in Europe who now hold back on caricatures of Muhammad, fearful of meeting the same fate as the Charlie Hebdo staff. Jews in France are worried about their future; the spate of attacks by Muslims on Jews in France suggest they are right to worry. There has been a great increase in the numbers of French Jews going to Israel.
Meanwhile, Muslims continue to push for changes in the laic state. They still have not given up, for example, attempts to challenge the ban on the hijab in schools. And when cartoonists are killed for having “blasphemed” Muhammad, too many Muslims express not abhorrence but approval. Muslims recognize and are prepared to exploit the freedoms, political and civil, created by and for the Infidels, and are ready to exploit them to further their own, Muslim, ends.
For Western man, the legitimacy of any government depends on that government reflecting, however imperfectly, the will expressed by the people through elections. Islamic political theory is based on a very different idea: the legitimacy of government depends on the ruler being a Muslim, and the will to be expressed is that of Allah, as set down in written form in the Qur’an, and an additional fleshing-out of the Qur’an’s meaning comes through study of the Sunnah, that is, the practices of the earliest Muslims, derived from the Hadith and Sira, which become a kind of gloss on the Qur’an.
Western man exalts the individual; in Islam, it is the collective, the community of Believers. And the true object of worship in Islam turns out to be Islam itself; it is Islam itself that Believers must protect from attack. Morality in Islam is determined by what Muhammad said or did; he remains the Model of Conduct, the Perfect Man, and for all time. Those who assume that the millions of Muslims who have been allowed into Europe and North America are going to “integrate” into non-Muslim societies, societies with manmade laws quite different from the Sharia, without difficulty, fail to recognize that this would mean jettisoning much of Islam. It could require seeing Muhammad in a critical light, and doing away with Muslim supremacism. Is this conceivable? And it should not be forgotten that Muslims have a duty to conduct Da’wa, the Call to Islam, to promote Islam as the Truth.
3) The OPEC trillions from oil, and the Muslim migrant millions in the West, are two of the three significant developments that explain Muslim power today. The third development consists of the appropriation and effective use, by Muslims, of technological advances originating in the Western world, and therefore made by Infidels, that made it much easier to disseminate the Call to Islam to Infidels, and the full message of Islam to Believers worldwide, to spread the message of the most austere and implacable kind of Islam — Wahhabism — and even to recruit for Al Qaeda and ISIS (who would have thought that decapitation videos could serve as recruitment tools for those luring others to actively participate in violent Jihad?).
Without audiocassettes, without those taped sermons urging violence, Khomeini might never have been able to whip up, from his distant exile in Neauphle-le-Chateau in France, so many hundreds of thousands of fanatical followers in Iran. Without videocassettes, and satellite television channels and the Internet, it would have been much harder to spread Islamic propaganda, including that put out by Al Qaeda and ISIS. Decades ago, simple pious Muslims could conduct their lives without being whipped up to violent Jihad, aware that they needed to fulfill their five canonical daily prayers, but only vaguely aware of the duty to take part in Jihad. Thanks to the Internet, they are now much more aware of the extent of their duties as Muslims.
In summary: it is these three developments — first, the OPEC trillions, that have given the Arabs such wealth to influence everything from U.N. votes to Western economic interests; second, the Muslim migrant millions in the West who have become, in 2015, many millions; and third, the appropriation of Western technological advances to spread the message of Islam — that help explain the reappearance of Islam as a fighting faith that everywhere threatens non-Muslims. Muslims who just a century ago were deploring Muslim weakness and Western strength are now able to deploy vast financial power and use it to increase their political clout and to obtain arms. Muslims by the many millions are now settled in Dar Al-Harb, behind what they regard as enemy lines.
What will happen now to the Arab use of the “wealth” weapon? Advances in renewable energy (e.g., in solar collectors and wind farms), and the growing recognition that the use of oil has to diminish if climate warming is to be slowed down, may lessen the amount of money that flows to Muslim oil states. But those states already have money stockpiled that they can still use to buy arms and influence. And as we have seen, the Muslim presence in Europe continues to increase, especially with the influx of “Syrians”; the geert-wilders and marine-le-pens bravely keep up their warnings about the Muslim invasion, but continue to go largely unheeded by the main parties. It’s still easy to affix the word “bigot.” Still, reports from Germany suggest that Merkel’s admitting so many “Syrians” is meeting with increasing opposition.
ISIS, the Islamic State, came into existence because Sunni Muslims in Iraq and Syria believed that their governments – Shi’a-dominated in Iraq, Alawite-dominated in Syria – scanted Sunni interests in the distribution of the national spoils. Those in the West who thought that ISIS was a fleeting phenomenon, that the Shia-dominated Iraqi government would retake Mosul, that ISIS could not possibly hold the territories it seized in such rapid fashion, or would not be able to run the territories it had conquered as a real state, when it has both held those territories and has begun to organize them and assume the responsibilities of rule, should recognize how formidable ISIS has become. Its appeal is wide, as the tens of thousands of recruits, including doctors and engineers, who have arrived from abroad testify.
No Western government has yet dared to broadcast any information about the connection between the political, economic, social, and intellectual failures of Muslim societies and Islam itself. Indeed, one discovers that even in the West, deep behind enemy lines, in Dar al-Harb, Muslims are watching not the regular Western channels, but insisting on getting their news — in Dearborn as in the East End of London, and in the banlieues of Paris and Lyon and Marseille — from Al-Jazeera (owned by Qatar), Al-Manar (run by Hezbollah), and other Arab stations. Willingly, many Arab Muslims in the West choose to limit themselves to stations spouting Arab Muslim propaganda, for only these stations are “telling the truth.” The ability to modify the views of Muslims enjoying life in the West, so that they will no longer pose a threat to the non-Muslim order, is limited.
Islam is naturally totalitarian — a total belief-system that leaves no area of life untouched. It offers a Compleat Regulation of Life and Total Explanation of the Universe. Over many centuries when Muslims had no technological advances to appropriate from the Western world, nor the wealth with which to exploit those advances (and thus lacking the ability to spread the full doctrines of Islam throughout both Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Harb), Muslims were able to conduct their lives without necessarily being fully aware of, much less always following, at every step, all the teachings of Islam. But today’s technology makes things different. The full undiluted message of Islam, now easily available to those who might once have been ignorant or even unobservant Muslims, is available. Muslims everywhere know that the full teachings of Qur’an and Hadith are a mere click away, and the Internet makes the same undiluted message available to Infidels who are suffering from various degrees of disaffection with the modern world, the West, Kapitalism, The System, Amerika, call it what you will, and who may find Islam attractive.
For we have seen that Islam is a mental system that appeals to those who prefer to have a life totally regulated from above. They find it perfectly acceptable to take as a model a seventh-century Arab, who may or may not have existed (that doesn’t matter, as long as Muslims believe he existed), described in the Qur’an as uswa hasana (the Model of Conduct), and elsewhere as al-insan al-kamil (the Perfect Man). For the socially and psychically marginal among Infidels, for those yearning to suppress their own individuality in a larger group, the umma al-islamiyaa (Community of Islam) provides an instant community. Islam is just the thing. Western man, who has come to prize skepticism and individualism, may not understand its attraction. The convert to Islam, in or out of prison, does not deplore, but welcomes, his own submission to Islamic authority, is glad to be supplied with answers as to the conduct of life based on passages in the Qur’an or stories in the Hadith, and finds soothing the notion that Allah Knows Best. It makes life simpler. In other words, Western governments should not underestimate the attraction of Islam to non-Muslims, nor assume that Muslims in the West will forget their duty to conduct Jihad.
Angemon says
On the bright side of things, these means are also used to get the word around about what islam teaches.
I should learn Arabic – I’d translate that as “the insane camel”.
D Drewes says
You wrote: “I should learn Arabic – I’d translate that as “the insane camel”.”
I Love it! Brilliant, just brilliant.
DFD
jihad3tracker says
I SEND A DEEP THANK-YOU OF APPRECIATION TO MR. FITZGERALD FOR THIS EXTREMELY COMPREHENSIVE ACCOUNT OF “WHERE THINGS STAND”.
Original posts like this — by a master of scholarly analysis — show time and time again why Jihad Watch is the 24 Karat gold standard for knowledge which becomes, for me, an immense lattice, a framework on which my understanding of Islam grows, with facts and concepts given a specific place to be located, thenceforth inter-related, showing cause and effect relationships.
awake says
Excellent analysis. A fourth could be the reality of infiltration by Muslims and Islam apologists in all walks of life, including, but not limited to positions in government, maybe even a person of two in the White House currently.
underbed cat says
Cohesiveness found in nature with drops of water, falling into the earth creating puddles, streams, rivers, seas and oceans, forming the force of waves to tsunami destructive power seems to be physical property that goes thru my mind as I understand the excellent decription of the events that formed the forces that allowed the spread of islam. Thisexcellent, article long in lenght describes a human trait of the desire for security found in removing the struggle of freedom. A cohesive mass of common thought, deception, barbaric behavior under the cover of piousness.
Nothing happens by accident as I consider the many era’s I have lived thru all of which had the creation of insecurity by unknown forces to weaken, separate and conquer the west, and to question and despise our own existence. The loss of the goal of goodness and faith.
Jay Boo says
I find it very difficult to believe that someone as intelligent as John Esposito could be so willingly ignorant. I suspect that something more sinister than mere liberal hubris is going on.
Have liberals like him who tend to be hedonistic rationalizers been caught cheating on their wife and been lent a sympathetic audience by Muslim men who can have up to four wives? Or have they been fiddling with their nine year old daughters.
Muhammad married a nine year old baby girl.
jihad3tracker says
Hello again Jay —
Do you think there is a tiny chance that Esposito at ACMCU (along with the “team” there –as they call themselves) are getting some of the $32 Billion which ultra-generous Prince Alwaleed (whom the ACMCU is named for)?
Even one percent of that pile of scratch can buy a lot of ignorance. Readers here should visit the website — part of foolish-privilege-guilt Georgetown University’s compendium — to see with your own eyes how the curriculum vitae, lectures, seminars, and authorship of faculty & a phony “Bridge Initiative” have rotten stink of taqiyya and stealth jihad.
Jay Boo says
Good point, jihad3tracker
Maybe in his case:
“cheating on their wife” or
“fiddling with their nine year old daughters” is not the reason.
Dacritic says
Jay, this statement of yours, “I find it very difficult to believe that someone as intelligent as John Esposito could be so willingly ignorant” is just what I have been always wondering myself, about the Muslim associates and friends of mine who have proven to be intelligent at everything else but not at all intelligent when it comes to Islam. Why? It really is one of the great mysteries of the universe. Why would someone still cling to Islam despite all the facts and references presented to them, and mostly from their own Muslim sources no less??
Jay Boo says
How can some people still be passively neutral.
I am reminded of a line spoken with calm self assurance.
I believe it was by the (Mrs. Howell character on Gilligan’s Island)
“I neither like nor dislike anything”
Edward says
“Where Things Stand”
“could be forgiven for assuming that they would not become the targets of Arab – and Muslim – terror attacks”.
“could be forgiven for assuming”, “hell” there’s no time left for assuming. There is an old saying that to “assume” makes an “ass out of you and me”. The link to Islam’s present propagation of their evil intent shows their fast progress is pretty evident….since 911. Fourteen years ago 911 should’ve trigger our serious concern about America’s future. Modern transportation and technology has made an overnight atrocity an absolute reality nowadays.
A historical timeline of the Muslim’s cyclic passionate world domination endeavors to make submissive of all humanity here on earth would be helpful to track their prescience. Submission to their mythical god has been their goal since Islam’s adherents started ramping up their campaign 1400 years ago.
The timeline found on the linked website below has made possible both a compiled listings and expanded world coverage of Islam’s achievements throughout the centuries. Strangely, North America map has not been updated to the 911 atrocities event. Even though the world map is dated 2005. I don’t know why. Much is needed to learn about its author and his agenda ….Howard Bloom. He seems to be very involved with human social evolution event studies…as a liberal would! BTW, he started his career by being a hippy to begin with……acid I guess!
http://howardbloom.net/the-lucifer-principle/islams-war-to-save-the-world/
http://www.howardbloom.net/militant_islam_map.gif
gravenimage says
Edward wrote:
“could be forgiven for assuming that they would not become the targets of Arab – and Muslim – terror attacks”.
“could be forgiven for assuming”, “hell” there’s no time left for assuming.
……………………….
Edward, Hugh Fitzgerald meant people could be forgiven for assuming this *before* 9/11–not today.
voegelinian says
And there have been attacks on cartoonists, of various nationalities, who dared to mock Muhammad – the Charlie Hebdo staff in Paris was massacred, and in Denmark attempts – fortunately unsuccessful — were made on the life of Lars Vilks. In both cases the putative crime was “blasphemy.”
Not to mention that about a month after the Mohammedan commando operation against the Charlie Hebdo staff at their offices in Paris, there was another attack in Copenhagen, Denmark — first at the Krudttønden cafe “during a debate featuring the controversial Swedish artist Lars Vilks, who had depicted the prophet Muhammad in cartoons.” At that incident, Finn Nørgaard, 55, a film director attending the event, was shot dead. A few hours later (just as happened in Paris after the Charlie Hebdo razzia), a synagogue in Krystalgade was attacked by a Muslim (or more) during a bat mitzvah celebration, killing the security guard, “Two police officers were also hit, but their injuries were said not to be life-threatening.”
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/14/copenhagen-cartoonist-charlie-hebdo-style-attack
Hugh Fitzgerald’s essay of course isn’t meant to be a full litany of all the attacks by Muslims against us that have occurred in the past 14 years, nor all the plots Muslims have been hatching to mass-murder us. Sometimes I wonder if people throghout the West are as sanguine as they are because they haven’t really digested that full litany, and persist in assuming it’s not as bad as it really is — where “bad” includes two qualities:
1) it’s systemic (i.e., so broad-based among the Muslim populations that it no longer becomes workable for our society’s safety to continue to assume the TMOE Meme (only a “Tiny Minority of Extremists” are the problem).
and
2) it’s metastasizing — it’s getting horribly worse; it’s not a stable problem like the incidence of car accidents or bank robberies, for example, which are problems all societies have, but which do not rise to a level where they require a game-changing paradigm shift in our conception of the problem, and in the ways we rationally figure out to manage the problem.
gravenimage says
Voegelinian wrote:
Not to mention that about a month after the Mohammedan commando operation against the Charlie Hebdo staff at their offices in Paris, there was another attack in Copenhagen, Denmark — first at the Krudttønden cafe “during a debate featuring the controversial Swedish artist Lars Vilks, who had depicted the prophet Muhammad in cartoons.” At that incident, Finn Nørgaard, 55, a film director attending the event, was shot dead…
……………………….
True–while the targeting of Vilks specifically was unsuccessful, this was not a foiled Jihad terror attack.
Jeremiah says
It is difficult to believe that Muslim-loving socialists are still in an elected government.
Just watched a verbal attack on Geert Wilders in Dutch Parliament. Geert was asking for a response to increase violence by the massive young male invaders into Holland. The response by Parliament is that such an approach is hateful and that the Netherlands should prosecute those who resist this violence instead. Their point was that resistance is also on the rise.
Now that seems logical if you need the votes of the invading armies.
voegelinian says
But money alone does not explain why so many people in the West have been so ready to ignore the evidence of Muslim malevolence…
Two problems with this juncture of Fitzgerald’s essay. One is that money (or cupidity) we may reasonably conclude only would sway a very tiny minority of Westerners in influential positions in government, academe, news media, business, and arts & entertanment into consciously and willfully supporting Islam’s evil designs to destroy the West — for we reasonably conclude that only a very tiny minority of Westerners in influential positions in government, academe, news media, business, and arts & entertanment are that lucidly, seditiously evil. So cupidity doesn’t explain the phenomenon we are trying to explain — why the majority thorughout the West (not only the Dastardly Elites, and not only those Darned Leftists, but vast swathes of Ordinary People in all walks of life, on all points of the political spectrum, of every religious and cultural disposition imaginable) continue to whitewash Muslims and their Islam.
Then Fitzgerald’s juncture becomes a pivot toward another attempt at explaining this mass neurosis of the Neo-Modern West”
But money alone does not explain why so many people in the West have been so ready to ignore the evidence of Muslim malevolence, of widespread support for violent Jihad. Many In the West simply don’t want to see what is staring them in the face. For if Islam really does inculcate permanent hostility toward Infidels, what, then, is to be done about the tens of millions of Muslims already ensconced in Western lands?
But this isn’t really an explanation — “Many In the West simply don’t want to see what is staring them in the face.” It’s a description of the phenomenon; not an explanation for why it’s there. And given the massive dimensions of the Elephant in the Room it persists in industriously ignoring, not to mention the colossal gravity of the dereliction it causes in terms of an egregious myopia to monumental human rights abuses and disastrous dangers to our collective Western security, we — this canaries-in-a-coalmine spearhead of a rag-tag movement called the “Counter-Jihad”, whose main activity is trying to awaken its own West to this problem — need to come up with not merely a better explanation, but an explanation at all (since simply saying that our fellow Westerners “simply don’t want to see what is staring them in the face” is not an explanation for why they are behaving this way. Over the last few years on my blog I have taken stabs at what an explanation would look like, with dozens of detailed and lengthy analyses. I see few signs that anyone in the Counter-Jihad has thought deeply or carefully enough about this “Problem of the Problem” (where the primary Problem is that of Muslims and their Islam, and the secondary Problem is that of the West persisting in its myopia about the primary Problem) — and so they tend to lapse into reflexive assumptions based upon this “Explanatory Vacuum”, even if vaguely they have a dim sense that “political correctness” is the culprit.
Stu says
Could you provide a link to your blog, as I am interested in your explanation? My guess is that the herd mentality of political correctness and fear of being called a bigot, racist, or islamophobic creates cognitive dissonance people would prefer to avoid.
voegelinian says
Yes, the PC MC Western fear of “bigotry” and “racism” (where the sneer quotes indicate not real bigotry and racism, which all good men and women ought to eschew, but what they have become irrationally twisted into by Leftism and PC MC) is the main reason why the West remains myopic to the Islam of all Muslims.
Here’s a partial list of essays on my Hesperado blog on this:
http://glossaryhesperado.blogspot.com/2015/10/a-partial-list-of-my-hesperado-essays.html
voegelinian says
Note, most of those essay in that list do not go directly into the pseudo-“racism” angle, as there are many moving parts to this Problem of the Problem which I explore.
The Countess says
Thank you for a fine article.
VRWC member77 says
This was a great piece until the part about —
“the growing recognition that the use of oil has to diminish if CLIMATE WARMING is to be slowed down, may lessen the amount of money that flows to Muslim oil states. ”
—appeared.
This is the second accepted premise on “climate change” on this site in as many days. Please stop with promoting memes from the left.
Helen Hesketh says
Hear, hear
voegelinian says
Hugh Fitzgerald is an atheist, and for some reason due to the subcultural worldview of atheists (which, naturally, they deny they have), they tend to buy into PC MC shibboleths — “climate change” being one of them. What’s refreshingly surprising in this regard is that an atheist like Fitzgerald has broken ranks with his worldview so deeply with regard to the problem of Islam.
Stu says
I’m an atheist and believe that Islam is a serious threat to Western culture. I despise the West’s self-hatred, which is probably why we accept Arab bigotry towards Jews, accept their victim status, and try to placate them whenever they rant. Bottom line, Western politicians are weak and stupid and Muslims exploit this to their advantage.
Ironically, I believe Christianity is the one “force” capable of resisting Islam – secularism will not be strong enough to resist the insidious gains Islamists are making in the West.
However, these are my beliefs. As an atheist, I prefer facts. The facts I see is that Western politicians willfully ignore the evidence of Islamic violence and their ultimate goal: world domination.
BTW: not believing in a God does not make someone PC or MC. I try to be polite because it feels good to be nice to people. PC is an attack on free speech, and MC has proven to be an abject failure. Unless people assimilate culturally, separate “tribes” in a geographic area will invariably end in conflict. For example, “they’re taking all our jobs” or “my taxes are paying for their welfare.”
voegelinian says
“BTW: not believing in a God does not make someone PC or MC.”
True; but atheism & agnosticism do seem to tend to predispose a person to being PC MC; which I think has historical-cultural reasons — mainly due to the fact that post-modern atheists and agnostics owe most of their psychological & cultural substance to the French Enlightenment, which was a profound incubator & laboratory for the creation of Leftism which, in turn, facilitated the cultural growth industry of PC MC.
Linde Barrera says
To Hugh Fitzgerald- Thank you for a superb article, which I would entitle as “The 25 Year Marathon of Islam.” There is 1 factor that was briefly mentioned but deserves more attention: the invasive and pervasive use of deception and lies in the spread of Islam. An example: I receive The Times Of Israel on my Facebook feed. One commenter, Neta Goldberg, (who might be a “front” because there is no photo or profile) gave an answer to me (I post under my legal name, Linde Barrera) regarding how big and bad Israel is and how Israel can be equated with the terrorism of IS. Neta Goldberg provided several links to substantiate her claims, 2 of which I will give here. http://www.globalresearch.ca/israel-joins-forces-with-isis AND http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/08/14/375300/fsa-commander-in-cahoots-with-israel. Please watch both of these videos, they are not long. Then compare the information supplied by the videos to this statement in the article: “ISIS, the Islamic State, came into existence because Sunni Muslims in Iraq and Syria believed that their governments- Shia dominated in Iraq, Alawites dominated in Syria, scanted Sunni interests in the distribution of the national spoils.” So as a person who came to Jihad Watch 11 months ago to learn truths about Islam, I would believe Hugh Fitzgerald, yet I can’t help but wonder how many people believe the information put out there by these videos, and be ready to condemn Israel as being “just like ISIS.” Would be interested in your thoughts, everybody.
wjsonl says
Good description of the problem. But what do we do about it in the US? The solution is tough, but must involve the following:
1) Ban Islam from the US.
2) Tear down all mosques.
3) If you want to continue to be a Muslim, then you must leave this country and go to a country where Islam is allowed. If you won’t leave, then you will be deported.
4) Enforce no nukes in Iran, North Korea, and any country not supposed to have nukes according to the non-proliferation treaty of decades ago. Inspections will be done by the US, not the UN.
voegelinian says
wjsonl’s recommendations are likely to be the only rational thing which America (and indeed the entire West) will be compelled to do eventually about the problem; mainly because Muslims are going to get continually and horribly worse as the years and decades chug along — and because on our side we will eventually wake up to the grim and dismaying reality that all Muslims are waging war against us, a war that combines terrifying violence and clever deceit about that violence.
wjsonl however may not realize, however, how deeply and broadly his recommendations would receive resistance, in many different, subtle, niggling ways from many Counter-Jihadists — including those here at Jihad Watch such as Angemon, Mirren, gravenimage, Wellington, and quite a few others. I’m rather surprised one of them (particularly their bloodhound — or rather Energizer Bunny — Angemon, hasn’t already alighted upon wjsonl’s post here in order to needle him with Hillary-Clintonesque peer pressure & shaming.
Angemon says
voegelinian posted:
“those here at Jihad Watch such as Angemon, Mirren, gravenimage, Wellington, and quite a few others. I’m rather surprised one of them (particularly their bloodhound — or rather Energizer Bunny — Angemon, hasn’t already alighted upon wjsonl’s post here in order to needle him with Hillary-Clintonesque peer pressure & shaming.”
Huh, are you high or something? The “Hillary-Clintonesque peer pressure & shaming” is your shtick, not mine, as it can be seen in the dozens, if not hundreds, of your posts where you cry and insist – nay demand – other people are to jump in, defend you and shout down dissenting voices, alongside the hundreds, if not thousands, of your posts where you insult, mock and deride JW analysts and commenters alike. It must be hard to be a one-man peer-pressuring machine, but by golly, that never stopped you from trying.
You badgered people via email to get them to peer pressure me, you wrote in your blog that other users (including Mirren, gravenimage and Wellington, all of whom you’re decrying now) should be peer pressuring me to not disagree with you, and you recently went to “enlist” people in PalTalk to come here and harass me. Heck, that whole paragraph of yours is nothing but an attempt at public shaming. And, of course, you don’t provide any example of me, Mirren, gravenimage or Wellington doing any of the things you’re accusing us of – you’re just throwing crap around, like a monkey with its feces. In fact, why you insist on coming back (exactly how many times were you banned?) to a place populated with people you recently referred to as “fucktards” with a “strange brain impediment” is beyond me.
Seek help, get a grip on your mental sanity, learn to be (or at very least act like) a civilized human being instead of the sad, pathetic little man consumed by hatred and anger that you are, and try again.
PS: Am I a “bunny” or a “bloodhound”? Pick an animal and stick with it.
gravenimage says
Voegelinian wrote:
…those here at Jihad Watch such as Angemon, Mirren, gravenimage, Wellington, and quite a few others. I’m rather surprised one of them (particularly their bloodhound — or rather Energizer Bunny — Angemon, hasn’t already alighted upon wjsonl’s post here in order to needle him with Hillary-Clintonesque peer pressure & shaming.
…………………………
This is nothing but calumny, Voegelinian–certainly, a grotesque and deliberate mischaracterization of my positions and approach.
But recently you dismissed everyone at Jihad Watch as “f*cktards”, so sadly I suppose this should not surprise.
Angemon says
gravenimage posted:
“This is nothing but calumny, Voegelinian–certainly, a grotesque and deliberate mischaracterization of my positions and approach.”
It is also a serious case of projection, GI. None of the people he accuses ever engaged in bullying or “Hillary-Clintonesque peer pressure & shaming“. On the other hand, there are dozens of his posts here where he decries you, Mirren and Wellington precisely for not peer pressuring me into silence, he wrote in his blog that you, Mirren and Wellington should be pressuring me into silence, and since people here were willing to act as his own private army of brownshirts, he ventured somewhere else to”enlist” people to come here and peer pressure and harass me.
Completely surreal and unhinged.
Veronica says
While not discounting the general drift of this article – thanks ! I just wanted to point out that your history lesson is discounting the immense achievements of the Arabic peoples especially during Europe’s dark ages – look at the wonderful developments in Spain – I visited a castle there years ago and saw for myself the great underground cistern they had used to store water & other technology – they were great engineers, so to discount that is missing part of the true picture of history. If you put out a dishonest view of things you are discrediting yourself ! Current Islamic societies certainly do not seem to be developing anything new that is true (except palm shaped islands that will get submerged when sea-levels rise!!!) – but I just wanted to clear up the history of things to keep this article from being just another ‘those nasty Muslims’ rant – we need the blistering truth at all times, not anti-Muslim hatred – the truth is enough !
AnneCrockett says
Veronica, while I cannot precisely speak to the cisterns you saw, a great many of the Arab achievements during Europe’s early Middle Ages were borrowings from conquered cultures and quickly stagnated. I am sure both Hugh and Robert have written on this in the past.
Angemon says
Veronica posted:
“While not discounting the general drift of this article – thanks ! I just wanted to point out that your history lesson is discounting the immense achievements of the Arabic peoples especially during Europe’s dark ages – look at the wonderful developments in Spain – I visited a castle there years ago and saw for myself the great underground cistern they had used to store water & other technology – they were great engineers, so to discount that is missing part of the true picture of history.”
The true picture of history is that Arabs stole tech form more advanced nations they conquered – well, whatever little they did not manage to destroy during conquest. As for Spain, ~90% of the invading force was Moorish with the remaining 10% or so being Arab. Chances are, the engineers and works behind whatever it is you saw were Christian and Jewish dhimmies.
“If you put out a dishonest view of things you are discrediting yourself !”
Just like when not practicing what you preach.
“Current Islamic societies certainly do not seem to be developing anything new that is true ”
It’s been a while since they last conquered a more advanced nation.
“I just wanted to clear up the history of things to keep this article from being just another ‘those nasty Muslims’ rant – we need the blistering truth at all times, not anti-Muslim hatred – the truth is enough !”
Well, you failed at that. A quick question: if the Arabs/Mooers were such a benevolent, advanced civilization, why didn’t the Spaniards stopped fighting until they were kicked out?
Daniel Triplett says
Most all of the beautiful architecture and engineering feets in Dubai were built with Western Contracts.
Daniel Triplett says
As a military/airline pilot, I’ve been to most all Muslim countries.
Dubai, BTW is the ONLY Muslim controlled territory where I’d set foot anymore without being fully armed with a military escort.
Daniel Triplett says
Sorry Angemon, those were meant to be for @Veronica.
voegelinian says
Chances are that any supposed achievement or invention of the “Arabs” (i.e., the Muslim imperialists who included not only Arabs, but countless other peoples who joined Islam out of brainwashing terror wearing them down over generations) was stolen from other cultures.
One of the many correctives which a person waking up to the horror of Islam must go through, eventually, is disabusing him or herself from the Myth of Andalus, or the Myth of the Islamic Golden Age. The other side of that trite coin is the suposedly benighted “Dark Ages”. Such a person would do well to read the fine corrective by historian Régine Pernoud, Those Terrible Middle Ages!: Debunking the Myths.. Here’s a tasty review:
http://www.newoxfordreview.org/reviews.jsp?did=0601-storck
One can’t fault Veronica too much, given that the entire West is in thrall with PC MC, such that even the Republican candidate for Presidency of the United States, Carla Fiorina, could deliver a nauseating (and erroneous) paean to Islam’s Golden Age (with pointed digs at her own Western Middle Ages) while the smoke was still clearing from 911, no less.
More broadly and deeply, Veronica should educate herself on the copious literature that’s available (the Age of Google leaves no one justified in continuing to indulge such ignorance any longer) on the Myth of the Golden Age of Islam. A good place to start would be articles and books found at New English Review:
http://www.newenglishreview.org/
See also this interesting glimpse into the larger issue:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/04/danish-professor-jihadis-are-just-following-the-example-of-muhammad/comment-page-2#comment-1219203
gravenimage says
Veronica wrote:
I just wanted to point out that your history lesson is discounting the immense achievements of the Arabic peoples especially during Europe’s dark ages – look at the wonderful developments in Spain – I visited a castle there years ago and saw for myself the great underground cistern they had used to store water & other technology – they were great engineers, so to discount that is missing part of the true picture of history. If you put out a dishonest view of things you are discrediting yourself !
………………………………………
Veronica, the idea that the Muslim conquest of swatches of Europe constituted a “Golden Age” is, I’m afraid, a piece of revisionist history.
Here’s Hugh Fitzgerald himself on the subject:
“Fitzgerald: The persistent myth of Andalusia”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2005/11/fitzgerald-the-persistent-myth-of-andalusia
But also, one wonders at the consistent need to say something complimentary about Islam–even if it *were* true that a castle in Medieval Spain had an advanced cistern system due to Muslim engineers, how would that in any way minimize the terrible threat we face from Islam today?
More:
Current Islamic societies certainly do not seem to be developing anything new that is true (except palm shaped islands that will get submerged when sea-levels rise!!!)
………………………………………
Veronica, Islamic societies in most cases are not developing this sort of thing themselves at all–for instance, the Burj Kalifa–currently the world’s tallest building–was designed by an American engineering firm, and built by a South Korean construction firm.
In fact, if you wanted a new “Islamic Golden Age”, all we would have to do would allow ourselves to be conquered by Muslims–until Western innovation and productivity is fully crushed under the oppression and murder of Islam, we would produce things that would, no doubt, as in previous centuries, be claimed as “Muslim” achievements.
More:
…but I just wanted to clear up the history of things to keep this article from being just another ‘those nasty Muslims’ rant – we need the blistering truth at all times, not anti-Muslim hatred – the truth is enough !
………………………………………
The truth is indeed enough–it is not necessary for us to whitewash Islam and Muslim history every time we dare to mention that Islam presents a terrible threat to us.
Daniel Triplett says
@Veronica
Plus, it was likely subjugated, slave labor Spaniards who built that castle.
Daniel Triplett says
Brilliant, Mr. Fitzgerald.
Here’s my solution:
We must recognize the entire Islamic ideology as our enemy. Not just ISIS, Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah, Al Qaeda, etc. But ALL of Islam.
Disarming Iran and destroying ISIS isn’t enough. It’s just a matter of time before some other pious Muslim group under a different name figures out how to build, buy, or steal nukes. Whether it’s 1 year, 10 years, or 100 years, it will happen. Islam in its entirety must be extinguished from Earth.
Jihad is compulsory for all Muslims.
You’re either in the Ummah or you’re not. They won’t criticize their brothers, and why would they? They’re all just following the rules of their Quran, which they believe is the literal word of their deity. Remember, no one gets to debate Allah. This is why Islam will NEVER be reformed. It can only be extinguished.
Reforming Islam would deny the initial “perfection” of Allah’s word and Muhammad. This won’t happen in 10 years. This won’t happen in 10,000 years. Moreover, for a Muslim to even suggest reformation is Blasphemy, usually punishable with death.
And emulating Muhammad (the liar, murderer, robber, rapist, and pedophile “the perfect man”) is also mandatory.
They either swing the sword, or support those swinging the sword. None can be trusted.
Don’t forget, one out of seven US KIAs in Afghanistan are Green-on-Blue: US trained Afghan troops turning their guns on us.
People who are willing to murder their own children to please a fictional deity are deadly serious about their cause. Their will to fight is much greater than ours. They’ve been focused on their goal for 1400 years, and they will never give up until we’re all converted, subjugated, or dead.
The fact is, we don’t have the time, money, or method to sort out the “good” Muslims from the bad ones who would nuke us if handed the button. And are there any “good” Muslims anyway? Any individual buying into the evil contained between the covers of the Quran has a heart and soul manipulated by demons.
Nor did our grandfathers have the time, money, or method to sort out the good Germans and Japanese from the bad ones. So they bombed every German and Japanese man, woman, and child in sight until they surrendered unconditionally. We wouldn’t have won the war if we didn’t. We’d best develop the stomach and will to do the same.
Incremental Random Strategic Area Bombing is the ONLY solution.
Islam is Sedition and Conspiracy to Murder. Those are already crimes on the books. All that’s necessary is an honest and long overdue reclassification of Islam from “the religion of peace,” into the criminal enterprise it is. Then impose capital punishment on those practicing or promoting Islam. We can do that within our own borders, and force every Muslim government on Earth to do the same.
Iran is weeks away from nukes, and they promise to kill us. Meanwhile, most Americans want to end all wars, then eat ice cream. This is Total War, for all the marbles, and we’d better wise up quick.
We must ally with Israel, UK, France, India, China, and Russia, then drop one nuke on a random Muslim target every three days until we have Worldwide criminalization of Islam. Every Muslim government criminalizing Islam comes off the target list. The Muslims would get on board with the program real quick.
In exchange for Russia helping us destroy Islam and Iranian leadership, we let Putin annex Iran and its resources.
We should encourage Christianity, not force it, but make Apostasy from Islam mandatory.
On Day One of the operation, we target Iranian nuke production sites and the Pakistani nuke arsenal. Targeting hardware first, and threatening population centers later. This is how our grandfathers would do it, because it works.
We could extinguish Islam from the Earth inside of two weeks, for less than $7 Billion, without losing one Allied soldier’s or pilot’s lives.
We owe it to our children to win this fight now. This is our problem. Let’s not be cowards and make it theirs.
The Muslims are just moments away from having the capacity to nuke millions of us on a horrific scale. No guesswork necessary. They promise to do this to us.
We must act now. The solution is quite simple and inexpensive. All we need is the will.
DANIEL J. TRIPLETT, Maj, USAF (IRR)
Six year war vet Afghanistan/Iraq
Disciple of Christ and Crusader for Freedom
Infovoyeur says
Very good because realistic. However, I have heard that Islam will forever exist or rise because on can bomb people and areas, but not an IDEA which is in millions of print (Korans) worldwide.
wjsonl says
Islam is an idea that will not die, true, but it’s followers can be restricted to living in the mid-East, and Muslims can be prevented from having nukes (if we hurry).
Daniel Triplett says
@wjsonl
Please see above reply to infovoyeur.
Daniel Triplett says
@infovoyeur
Isolationism doesn’t really work though. They will figure out ways to sneak in anyway, either in person, ICBM, or nuke on a container ship.
Have you seen the new Dennis Michael Lynch movie, “They Come to America III?”
He filmed an ice bridge between Canada and NY. On the Canada side was a mosque/madrassa the size of a large university campus. Hundreds of Suburban loads of Muslims were driving across into NY daily, completely out of sight and unopposed by US Border Patrol.
So even if we built a Supermax Fence along the entire 1933 mile Mexican border, they’ll just come through the 3987 mile Canadian border.
Moreover, deporting Muslim US citizens isn’t practical. They have rights to remain. So all we can really do is criminalize Islam for them, making the practice or promotion of it a capital offense.
Europe would face problems even bigger problems preventing illegal immigration and forcing deportation, though I think they should give it a super strong effort. They have much bigger problems with Muslims than we do yet. And they’re still arriving by 100,000+ monthly.
You’re right about being unable to destroy an idea or every Quran in the World. And as with Nazism and Communism, Islam will always be in the history books.
But, if criminalized Worldwide, this would force the tenacious resisting Muslims to live as animals in caves. Not even their patriarch Bin Laden could stand that for very long, hence the 38,000 ft walled Abbottabbad compound, complete with electricity, plumbing, toilets, TV, and Internet.
Jeremiah says
The enemy is Islam, not Muslims. Most Muslims have never read the Koran. Those who do either throw up or blow up.
The teaching of Islam has to be dismantled and uprooted if we are going to stop this 1400 year war,
Those Muslims who object, are the ones we need to eliminate in a humane way. When we do, we don’t feel joy. We don’t dance in the streets or fire our weapons in the air. There is nothing pleasant in killing people. Some of these we thought were our friends but we now know they were just waiting to slaughter us.
That is the essence of the problem, the solution and our mentality as we preserve our Judaeo=Christian heritage.
Daniel Triplett says
@Jeremiah
Yes, you’re exactly right Jeremiah.
The objective is not to exterminate Muslims, but to extinguish their Islamic ideology. In much the same way the World could live in peace with the Germans once we extinguished Nazism.
We must begin a Worldwide re-education campaign concurrent with the force. They can’t be reasoned into surrendering Islam without the force. They need to see overwhelming shock & awe, broadcast all over social media. They must be made to feel intellectually and technologically inferior to Allied powers, and realize Allah is never going to save them.
Nuke weapons are arguably the most humane, since death is instantaneous. Ultimately, it won’t be good enough to just destroy the Iranian nuke production facilities, the Pakistani nuke arsenal, and Raqqa on the Day One. Unfortunately, most Muslim societies will need to experience the wrath directed against their own countrymen, or see it used against a very close neighbor.
Remember, even while Japan spent several years watching us level every German city, Japan’s aggression remain undeterred until they witnessed their own cities get razed. Why would Muslims in Indonesia be afraid, and surrender Islam just because we destroy some hardware in Iran? Randomness of our targeting will hasten victory, since every Muslim on Earth will believe he and his family could be next.
Although we take no pleasure in doing so, killing Muslim civilians in this campaign will be necessary. But the objective is to kill just enough of them to force their surrender, and not one soul more. The Japanese and Germans loved their children, and didn’t want them to die. However, Muslims love death more than life, and murder their children. So we must be prepared, and have the stomach to inflict a proportionally higher number of casualties than we did in WWII.
But hopefully by broadcasting the devastation on social media, we can quickly show the Muslims that defeat is a certainty, convincing them that Worldwide Dar al-Islam was never anything more than a demonic false fantasy, and Allah doesn’t exist.
We simply don’t have enough gold or military to invade and occupy 50 Muslim countries. We must use nuclear weapons to win. Forcing 50 Muslim countries to surrender Islam would take 3 weeks, in my best estimate, with one strike every 3 days.
dumbledoresarmy says
Dear Hugh
so good to see you posting here again.
I guess the only thing we can say for sure is that although the power of Islam has grown alarmingly, along with the size of its presence within the West (and in a lot of other places that were historically entirely free of Islam), the ad hoc volunteer army of what you once called “the unsung history boys” has grown considerably, and continues to grow, all over the West and beyond the West, too, in places like India. New people turn up here day after day, week after week; people who have only just ‘woken up’.
Could anyone have envisaged, back in 2001, a Buddhist monk in Burma protesting against the Muslim fifth columnists in his own country by holding up a sign saying – in English, clearly intended to speak beyond his own country to all those able to read English – “The World Is Not Only For Muslims”?
In 2001 nobody outside the Netherlands had ever heard of a Dutchman called Geert Wilders.
In 2000, who could have predicted that within the next couple of years the Italian journalist Oriana Fallaci, even as she endured a fatal illness, would write two blistering best-sellers – The Rage and the Pride, and The Force of Reason – that sold like hot cakes all over Europe?
In 2001, who could have predicted the appearance of a lanky, mild-mannered Australian scholar and (later) priest, Mark Durie, who – having studied the local language and literature in Aceh in the 1990s – would *recognise* the ‘fit’ between the events of 2001 and the traditional Islamic jihad poems of the Acehnese, and set out on a voyage of discovery, including a stint at the feet of Hans Jansen at the University of Leiden; and would absorb and distil and extend upon the pioneering work of Bat Yeor, in his book “The Third Choice”?
Things are going right down to the wire. It will be a close-run thing. But I think – I think – that there is hope. There is a chance. It is just a matter of grimly refusing to despair and, therefore, stubbornly keeping on, and keeping on.
The same technology that allows he Muslims to become red-hot Muslims and incite and hatch their jihad plots is allowing Infidels to observe that process, to investigate the Islamic sources themselves (in some cases beginning with mild curiosity, but always over time with ever mounting horror) and *also* allowing the Islamoaware *Infidels* to compare notes and instruct and encourage each other, from country to country, continent-to-continent.