I couldn't disagree with you more

Submitted by Noah Wilk (United States), Jan 10, 2007 at 00:31

Wrench in the engine of extremism wrote:What the hatemongers in this blog do not want to appreciate, is the fact that we can not just put all of ISLAM into one cliche drawer and consider them grosso mode as threat to the western civ."

"

First, your portrayal of those of us who strongly oppose Islam as "hatemongers" is inaccurate and uncalled for. Second, it is Islam itself that is breeding this violence, hence Islam itself must be dealt with en masse.

"I. Moderate ISLAM : Muslims, of the western world, second, third generation immigrants"

I've met many of these so-called second and third generation "moderates" and they are anything but moderate. We have yet to see this mythical mass of moderate Muslims step forward in any meaningful way to denounce terror and to transform their religion. Hence, they cannot be part of the solution as long as they remain passive observers.

"II. Muslims living in Muslim ( Arabic, PacRim) countries

III. Radical, Militant, Fundamentalist ISLAM - global and networked with above"

Most Muslims living in Islamic countries are radicals. See my post about the majority of Jordanians, Egyptians, and others who endorse terror in those countries. The numbers are all well above 50%. The division is not significant.

" As you, Chris, I was not much appreciated for that by our radical anti-islamic front.

Forcefully confronting a dire threat is hardly "radical".

"Millions of them live with us for generations now and we have yet to hear of suicide bombings in any City of the USA for example."

Covered this already in my other post. And it's not just the violence, it's the mass migration and demographic assault that's a danger. If Muslims become the majority here, we will end up with Sharia law, which is what CAIR wants and which is what happens everywhere they become a majority. Even in countries that are not run by Islamic law (Sharia), but where Muslims are the majority, look at how bad it is. Again, show me a country that is dominated by Islam/Muslims that does not feature suppression of rights, violence, intolerance, etc. The migratory attack is more insidious and more dangerous than outright terrorism.

"It is something, any even harsh regime could never defend against, let alone a civilized country with all our precious freedom and liberties."

If we, and Israel, would simply expel the invaders and ban Islam until it becomes civilized and reformed, we would not have a problem. There would be no Islamic force in America, no Islamic teachings, no Muslims.

"The "Threat" I can see from this category comes from its population growth, whereas our population shrinks. Something which has a lot to do with our so often denied decadence."

Our decadence is a matter of fact, and we can't keep denying it. And here we do agree. The population growth is where Islam is most threatening. The only way to defeat it is to outlaw Islam and deport Muslims.

"Since however ISLAM seems to be mu ch more all encompassing to its believers, I'd feel a bit uncomfortable, if Muslims would become majorities determining and dominating our legislature. First test in approx. 15 years:"

Wrong. First test occurred several days ago, and they failed. Ellison was sworn in on the Koran, and already he's engaging in revisionist history and claiming that Thomas Jefferson used the Koran partly as the basis for the US Constitution. Didn't take long for the propaganda to start! He was also asked whether, if a question of law came up where the Constitution said one thing and the Koran another, he would obey the laws of the Constitution or those of the Koran. He refused to answer.

Some people though, seem content to go to their graves denying reality.

"Vilifying, oppressing, attacking this segment would not only be not justified, it would create breeding grounds and open up millions of recruits for radical ISLAM."

Erroneous logic. They already hate us. They already endorse, or at least refuse to speak out against (and continue to fund), terrorism. This whole logic of "if we only stop opposing them, they will start liking us" is delusional in the extreme. Reality shows us this is simply not true. Explain, for example, Israel. Muslims there have more freedoms and rights than they have in ANY Muslim country, and yet they engage in non-stop terrorism there.

"The religion should be treated equal like any other church, strictly separated from state and monitored for what it preaches."

Can't be done. First, that would require us to publicly acknowledge the Koran as violent, as the source of violence for Muslims, as the motivating factor. No politician has the spine to do that. Doing so would result in a torrent of condemnation by Muslims, who are psychologically unable to criticize their religion.

"Our Freedom of Speech may have to be revised to the fact, that no Church, Mosque or Temple is to be allowed to preach fanatism, expansion and/or militancy."

There is no need for such "modification". As it already exists, you cannot incite violence or slander others. Freedom of speech in America already has limits and parameters built into it. And we're not enforcing it as it is now. So your idea here is already a moot point. We can and should be arresting and deporting (or jailing or even hanging) these radicals for inciting violence, but it's not being done. Our president and others are too busy falling over one another trying to prove what a loving, peaceful religion Islam is. To hear them speak, you'd think they were talking about Buddhism!

"Enforcement of this policy should include strict and decisive measures up to expatriation, even removal of citizenship for naturalized Citizens of any cult, movement, religion or breed. For others incarceration"

We already have the mechanism for this. Our society simply lacks the backbone and the will to enforce it.

"Giving Moderate ISLAM the means to influence, teach and educate its followers in the back countries would be another possible approach. Media, TV, Internet etc. Giving moderate muslim leaders public exposure would also educate our own paranoid populus. How about a practicing muslim as secretary of state or another important public office. Visibility. leading by example is the key."

We already have a member of Congress who is Muslim and he's already refused to say whether he would give the Constitution or the Koran ultimate authority in decision making, and has already started engaging in pro-Islam revisionist history, lies, and propaganda. Wake up!

"In parallel we would need to stimulate our own people again to build families and have chidren. That could be done via economical measures. Further, a strong visonary leadership builds trust, optimism and hope for a brighter future. The people need to be motivated again to partake actively in the political process. Voting could be made mandatory. The porking and corruption in most western capitals must be stopped, so people can trust their leaders again. People who promote "character counts". must get exposure, so core moral and ethical values become once again part of the rater decadent western life, as we see it currently."

You're talking about a revolution. That's what it would take at this point. We are beyond hope. Too many have literally grown fat and lazy, indolent and apathetic to what's going on. Our children are being indoctrinated into revisionist history, guilt complexes, multicultural anti-American nonsense, and all sorts of propaganda. We're losing our next generation. The generation after that, the takeover will be automatic.

"Lastly immigrants of any origin must assimilate. We should no longer allow for catering to minorities and the building of veritable ghettos in our big cities"

Again, I agree, but good luck making it happen.

Look, step one in any problem solving issue is to identify and isolate the problem. We refuse to face reality. We refuse to admit that Mexico is engaged in a subversive and purposeful assault on the United States, a migratory attack, which constitutes an act of war. We won't even refer to illegal aliens as illegal aliens. We use idiotic euphemisms such as "undocumented workers".

We refuse to acknowledge Islam as the root of the Islamic problem. We still insist that Islam is the "religion of peace".

If we can't even boldly acknowledge the problem, how can we do anything about it?

"Some of these countries are third world economies with outright medieval structures. Quality of life is subpar, unemployment, poverty and always in such cases correlated orthodox religious indoctrination."

They're that way simply due to following Islam. Everwhere Islam dominates, you see these problems.

"So of ten forgotten, it is The Western World which is sadly responsible for its greatest dilemma - the Palestine conflict. Generations of hate, several wars and holy shrines and places common to both Jews and Muslims in the same location have created an unsolvable problem and a deadly mechanism of action and reaction, revenge and retaliation. Who's land is it? how far back do we wanna go?"

Pure propaganda on your part. Do your research and read your history. The so-called "Palestinians" are mainly Jordanians and Egyptians. They have no legitimate, legal claim to that land. That whole issue was part of the Goebbels-like Big Lie started by the PLO in the 60's and 70's when the realized they could not defeat Israel in a conventional war.

"Western support for the few more "moderate" countries willing to pursue reform and accept ISRAEL as given. ( e.g Jordan, Egypt, Turkey.. now perhaps IRAK) Make them via Marshall plans model states. ( will take generations)"

Sure. Bow more money on them like we did with the so-called Palestinians, who then voted in Hamas? Right! Jordan, Turkey, Egypt? Far more than 50% of them, in a Pew study, endorsed violence against civilians over stupid things like cartoons of Mohammed. Wake up! Their governments may be "moderate" in comparison to that of Iran, but the population hates us.

"Europe must allocate serious budgets again to rebuild their defense forces. The US cannot do it alone."

We need to cut off all funding to Europe. It's unconstitutional for one thing. We already rebuilt them once, and protected them through the Cold War. Time for them to stand on their own two feet.

"Decisive, even interventionary action against militant countries (Iran, but also Syria) not excluding preventive strikes of magnitude. Set precedences."

If we had the backbone to do it. We don't. We should be making an example of Iran YESTEDAY and have already destroyed its nuclear capabilities and taken out their government. Won't happen.

"Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and other Oligarchies must be pressured to reform towards democracy."

Give us some details on how you're going to convert a hostile, fantical, uncivilized nation like Saudi Arabia, Iran, or Syria.

"Support domestic Moderate Islam to excert positive influence backward to their original countries."

Once again, see my example of the anti-terror rally for Muslims in Arizona, where virtually none of the 50,000 of them showed up. Show me anywhere in the world where these mythical "moderate" Muslims are exerting positive, anti-terror attitudes. I ask for this in each of my posts, and yet no one seems to be able to give me an example. What does that tell you?

"Divide and conquer = massive economical support to the ( friendly) Islamic PacRim states and lift them to western levels ( takes also time)"

Again, we've seen where investing money into Islamic countries gets us. Nowhere.

I'm not even going to address the rest of your post. I'm running short of time here, and so far you've given us no solution that will work or that we're willing to do. If Americans don't very soon wake up to the very real threat of illegal aliens flooding our land and diluting our culture, and about the migratory threat of Muslims into our land, then we're doomed.

---

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".