When Conservatives argue about Islam: A reply to donovan

Submitted by Jaisingh Thakur (India), Jul 29, 2007 at 02:43

Hats off to donovan for his "set and setting" comments. It is a fact well recognised by all the social scientists, ( please do not include those belonging to the left ), and even well commented on by them from time to time, that it is only when the proportion of muslims in a country rises to a certain level, say 10% or, 12% of the total population, that they start posing a danger to the very existence of those countries themselves, to the point of demanding a separate "homeland" for their 'millat', as the Indian experience very graphically shows.

All expression of gratitude, therefore to islamists for being moderate at their present level of population, is misplaced, at best, and perverse at worst. Islam and islamists have worked out a definite plan for their ultimate goal of islamisation of the world. In Europe, they would alternate between adopting a low profile ( as in U.K.) and pretend to condemn all acts of terrorism, while secretly sending 'mujahideens ' to fight a holy war against the infidels, ; in the U.S.A. they pretend to have been integrated into the U.S. society and agree to its war on terror in Iraq and Afghanistan , while at all times trying to increase their population, in countries like India, they adopt a policy of 'encirclement' by building madrassas on the Indo-Nepal border, systematic infiltration of muslim Bangla Deshis and their settlement in the choicest localities of Delhi and Mumbai, out breeding the non muslims, demanding more and more from the Indian politicians, posing as perpetual victims of social injustice, and the Indian political system. Islam and islamists, as we all know, have a plan to work on. The million dollar question is " Do we have one to counteract them ?"

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".