To Noah - Ban Islam and deport all Muslims? - What a pragmatic solution

Submitted by Wrench (United States), Jan 11, 2007 at 17:30

Thanks for your comments, Noah.

You dismiss most of my ideas, admittedly only a very rudimentary catalogue of potentially feasible approaches to a variety of concerns and "threats" quite nonchalantly, offering in contrast just ban of ISLAM and deportation of Muslims (as far as the domestic or Western Muslim Minority is concerned).

At least it's an idea, I can deal with, since most responders here simply present evidence as to why ISLAM is evil, without any effort to think about ways to address their fears and concerns. By now I am tired to hear about the evil - I want to hear about ideas and discuss solutions.

Do you honestly believe your ban and deportation to be a feasible, pragmatic strategy, considering the political, economical and cultural prerequisites? Not a chance in hell, would such ever be entertained by any Western Government or people, nor could it work. Fully totalitarian regimes with the corresponding evil apparatus of oppression have tried that in vain and ended up with an "Underground", revolution, civil war and finally collapse of their own regimes. Deportations of anywhere between 10 to 40% of the population depending on the country? Dream on, friend.

Yes - some of my ideas are almost as surreal as yours, considering the current status of affairs in the Western World. But some of them could fly, if there was a little bit of will and more willingness to change.

I will address a few of the good points you make:

First, your portrayal of those of us who strongly oppose Islam as "hatemongers" is inaccurate and uncalled for.Sorry, if that offended you. But reading the various responses, I could not help sensing a very negative, paranoid, highly emotional attitude towards the topic, to say the least. "evil, they like to kill us, wait in hiding, infiltrate us, the wretched of the earth, are all expressions I found right here. People like me are called "multi-culti idiots" and I could go on and on. If that is not hatemongering - what is? I'll admit, it goes both ways, but before I start patronizing the other side, which is anyhow not very well represented here, we should tone down our own language first. Wouldn't that be refreshing?

Forcefully confronting a dire threat is hardly "radical".

There is a thin line between forcefully confronting and slandering, This line has been crossed here in this Blog by representatives of the so called Civilized, democratic western world intelligentia, more often, than I feel comfortable with.

The migratory attack is more insidious and more dangerous than outright terrorism.

You call a fundamental fact of life, the pursuit of happiness, security, safety, stability, prosperity, self-preservation in light of basic human needs throughout history "migratory attack?"

All the Hispanics in California who will by sheer numbers eventually become the majority (soon) are therefore organized under one guiding conspiracy to conquer it? All immigrants who came in large numbers planned to take the host country over? Is a bunch of individuals trying to escape oppression, poverty and misery and try to get a better life all of a sudden an organized movement , trying to topple the Western World from within? I think your paranoia gets the better of you and you give normal human beings way too much credit.

If we, and Israel, would simply expel the invaders and ban Islam until it becomes civilized and reformed, we would not have a problem.

Yep – let's takethis big chunk of the world population and put them in spaceships and export them to Mars.
Problem solved. Sorry to be sarcastic, Noah, just not feasible – hence let's talk about somewhat pragmatic solutions.

Our decadence is a matter of fact, and we can't keep denying it. And here we do agree.Okay? And now what? Can we do something about it? Of course we can. Our decadence, laziness, obesity self-hatred, passiveness can be worked by a variety of means I have outlined in other posts. It is
N O T a fact of life we are forced to just accept.

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.

Assuming that your quote is true, I laugh it up as oddity or joke. Can't be taken seriously or considered a risk, as that would be considered as one deranged individual who most likely will not make a second term, if he continues to make such statements. The real and serious test is the first Western Country with a Muslim Majority, not one single individual in public office.

I dare to venture that the Netherlands will never implement Sharia Law, no matter what. It' s going to happen during our lifetime, so we'll find out , who is right.

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

As opposed to you I try not to use the word "THEY". Some of them may hate us, some of them do what you mention, those need to be opposed. By opposing all of them without distinction, even those many silent ones who never stand up - you will make many out of some.

And - stop talking about this so called non—stop terrorism. When I open the newspapers, I see gang and drug related shootings every single day. Organized crime related stories. Where the hell are these non stop (home-grown) terrorist attacks? Tell me – how many attacks with how many deaths have we seen here in the US since 9/11? What's the kill rate vs the 10k violent deaths/year in the USA? It is because the Islamic terrorism is mainly imported, hence can be defended against, why homegrown Islamic terrorism is currently inexistent in comparison.

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.In a way you contradict your own logic. Monitoring any religion for what it preaches, some form of revision of Freedom Of Speech, strictly enforcing separation of Church and state is impossible - yet banning ISLAM and deportation of its many followers is your solution? Given potentially more attacks in the future my idea has at least a slither of a chance and legitimacy.

… 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

Heck you can, because you're right, it is not enforced. Most of my ideas as to legislature quite actually are in place, but simply are not followed through. Yes - its all about enforcement.

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.

I agree, Noah – it would take an integral, fundamental media, educational and legislative assault on our decadence, an outright revolution indeed. But as opposed to you I am not yet willing to simply give up and state, it's hopeless. This mountain can be sliced up and tackled from various sides.

To the point enforced Assimilation : Again, I agree, but good luck making it happen.

There are existing templates ( Switzerland) proving that it can work and can be done.

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".

I agree with you on the illegal immigration. Mexico being engaged in a subversive migratory attack is a conspiracy theory you can not prove. Other than that, I answered the point above.

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?

That's just too simplistic. People turn to religion in a fanatic, militant manner, when they have nothing else to give their lives meaning and purpose. It is the reason why the level of militancy and radicalism is so much higher in the middle east than for instance right here in the USA. Acknowledging distinctions and shades within the global Muslim community with distinctive conclusions and reaction from our side is imperative. Distilling the root causes down to ISLAM as a religion is not only naïve but outright dangerous.

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.

I will not even touch on the debate as to who wants to lay claim on that former patch of desert. How about the French or English? How about the descendents of Salahadin? The Jews? The descendants of Babylon? Why not Africans – after all homo erectus originated there. The conflict, as we see it today , is a mess, we created, hence we have a moral obligation to help resolve it. How? – I am clueless, as that car sits so deeply in the sand, it would take a mammoth to pull it out.

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.

Once again you tell me, why it ain't gonna work and then stop there without a constructive idea.
After WWII and outright annihilation of Germany do you think the Germans hated the rest of us? Ask a person from Dresden. The Marshall plan and substantial rebuilding support after only a generation led to a populus we proudly called allies. Why not try that and follow through with Jordan or Turkey? Why not give it a chance to let Turkey integrate with the EU and start some form of positive domino theory? If we do it right and follow through, we may all of a sudden see your"migratory attack" on these countries…..

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.

Could not agree more with you. I am afraid it will take several disasters like 9/11 or indeed an Iranian freak show to get them to see the necessity for solid defense forces again. The decadence, pacifism, sick liberalism and appeasement in Europe has so far progressed, that even I as eternal optimist ( and former European) do not see much hope anymore.

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.

I disagree. Israel can not and will not allow IRAN to obtain nuclear weaponry. It's a matter of sheer self-defense and survival. I expect a preventive potential nuclear (subsurface bunker busting tactical nuke) strike within the next 5 years, if diplomatic pressure does not yield any results. Israel is running out of options quickly and, if they have to make a choice between UN resolutions and worldwide condemnation and their survival as a country, you be the judge, as to what they will do. (Can't blame them, by the way)

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

Saudi Arabia is as decadent as any western country. The regime could easily be toppled from within.
They could be pressured in many ways to perhaps reform to some sort of constitutional monarchy a la UK.
As far as Syria, IRAN and the likes are concerned, military intervention may be the only way to achieve short term objectives. The fractured western world however will not let that happen, I am afraid.

---

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".