Dismissing Islam is the biggest strategic mistake one can make

Submitted by Reuben Horne (Australia), Sep 6, 2006 at 20:41

Thomas,

There's no denying that much of what you point out is true. Moral and intellectual bankruptcy as well as asthetic impoverishment have plagued the Islamic world for many years and are perhaps the single greatest reason the lands of us infidels have been targetted for colonisation.

The grand mission of kill, dhimmify, enslave or convert goes on unimpeded by the institutions that are supposed to protect us. Instead we have constructed an elaborate system of terminology that seperates us from reality. PC Multi Kulti newspeak is only one branch of this Orwellian phenomenon (it is the most maladaptive one though I'll grant you) we have right wing Economically dominant think tanks that use similar lexicons to seperate themselves both from reality and the consequences of their policy decisions. The net effect of our division into narrow categories of expertise and the pursuit of economic goals above family and community is our demographic and political implosion.

We all have different ways of keeping our heads comfortably in the sand. The right justly worried about the grotesque transformation of Europe into Eurabia look forward to the prophesied time when either Jesus Christ will return or our mass media, individualism and consumerist society will sway the Islamist loving hoards of "imvaders" (which is a portmanteau: immigrant - invaders) from their cultural genocide of indigenous European values. The former Jesus reference is perhaps applicable to the Christian right the latter secular pro western orientation is a classic liberal view before the term was hijacked by Neo Marxists. Neither of these perspectives is a particularly sound projection of what lies ahead for dhimmified Europe.

The lefts views range from ignominious and treacherous to plain deranged. There is little question that whatever orientation, left or right of the European nations the governments have been secular to the point of being anti Christian adopting the prejudices of the worst of the left wing (though little evidence exists of them applying the same discriminatory treatment to the considerably more devout Muslim populations). So Islam and Christianity are seen as morally equal by these left wingers and the politicians they have influenced. None of them have dealt with the fundamental philosophical scism involving the golden rule "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" something which forms the philosophical basis of Judeo-Christian society (including our particular brand of socialism) and is routinely dismissed by Muslim clerics as being illogical. Islam trumps the violence ridden Deuteronomy in terms of its bellicose religious impositions on unbelievers and legitimises rape, slavery and genocide with a trickle of misinformation (to take into account the taqiyya you mention in the heading to your article).

Some left wingers think we deserve it - to be colonised in the same manner that the native American Indians were and persecuted, raped and wiped from the face of the earth. Bin Laden embraces these people where I sharpen my knives for them. In the first direct Democracy - Athens - the way they dealt with this form of dissent was to banish such people from the city by popular vote chiselling the person's name on shattered pottery called "ostrica" (which is where we get the word "ostracism" from). They are blind also to the innumerable genocides and religious wars launched by the Islamic faith in its 1400 year history. It has very rarely been the defender in all of its history with only two clearly defensive battles in the Koran iteself.

Other lefties say that our society is evil and therefore along similar lines not worthy of defence. They mix this with nonsensical existential philosophies that make a nonsense of rational debate. You can not use a "they" to describe Islam as it robs individual Muslims of their individual humanity (no matter how much individual Muslims do to rob all of us infidels of our individual and collective humanity). On the other hand you can use a "we" to describe the west and that "we" can be as narrowly or as broadly as you like to include all Europeans including eastern ones or a single country like Australia. A friend of mine once stated that "we" had no right to interfere with Indonesia's (the largest Muslim nation's) invasion and genocide in Christian "East Timor" since "we" had supplied the Indonesians with the arms they used to propagate the massacres. "We" in this instance meant Australia and therefore was actually completely untrue if by "we" he had meant the west in particular the US then he would have been half right (the U.S. sold Indonesia and continues to supply it with M5 carbine rifles and sophisticated infantry equipment in its quest for a legitimate Islamic ally - I expect these deadly tools to be used against Australia in a left wing supported invasion sometime in the next few decades).

Nonetheless had this been true wouldn't it have increased our obligation to clean up the mess under normal logical reasoning. The other flaw with his line of thinking in regarding individuals rather than groups and thus discarding the word "they" from common parlance is that it would not have allowed us to defend ourselves from any ideological contagion. The people who say "I met a muslim once they were nice people," would have condemned America's war on Fascism (WWII) had they met Oscar Schindler (a member of the Nazi Party as well as a saviour for a large number of Jews). These people are dysfunctional politically and are a heavy burden for the west to bear.

Contrast Islam. Whilst not a monolith they have greater cohesion in their push into the west than we have in our push into the east. Their communities are miniature states within states acting as a hive of fifth column activity that is impossible to police without invading the states from time to time. Thus muslims are only arrested when the outrage they commit is horrendous enough.

With the left's attempts at normalising sexual assault as a notion, at least insofar as it is a result of friction between western morays and those held by Muslim youth, expect our standards to spiral downwards. This is truly where we are most at risk - our states will no longer truly be our own. Terrorism and crime will become the norm. Often dismissed as the subject of sadomasochistic literotica this draws to mind the excesses of the barbary pirates, a crew of whom kidnapped the wife and daughter of a Conte in Italy, raping the both of them repeatedly until the women were both well and truly pregnant. The muslim pirates then returned the women demanding that the children if boys should be raised as good muslims otherwise they would return and take the women again this time for good. This could be applied as an analogy to the whole of Europe critics noting the masochistic and self flaggellating tendencies of the new left.

To extend this argument, a recent acquaintance of mine stated that Fucouis (a philosopher, deconstructionist and champion of the new left who seeks to free us all from "cultural conditioning" that comes as a package deal with western society) was guilty of a fundamental error when he applied gay sadomasochistic analogies to political situations. I believe that Fucouis' idea describes perfectly the relationship between Dhimmi and Islamic slavedriver.

To sum up, I personally am not sitting around waiting for Islam to collapse on its own. it is a highly successful and enduring model. Unless we reconnect language and ideas with reality, prepare for war and start developing home fronts to push back the onslaught of totalitarian invaders we will be history. And one might add history that will be taught in a slanted way or not at all by the Islamists who will fill the vacuum that will be Europe, America and Australia. Bending over to accommodate Muslims both literally and metaphorically as we have for the last forty odd years is only going to deepen the hole we need to climb out of simply to defend our way of life.

Cordially,

Reuben Horne.

---

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".