Well of course I do!

Submitted by Noah Wilk (United States), Jan 12, 2007 at 07:24

Wrench wrote:

"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"

Well of course I do. You're quoting the same old tired "solutions" that we've all heard a thousand times before and which we have seen simply do not work. Thrpwing more money at the Muslims, trying to appease them, trying to reason with them...these approaches do not work because they are a tribal people and mentally/emotionally quite different from Westerners.

"Do you honestly believe your ban and deportation to be a feasible, pragmatic strategy, considering the political, economical and cultural prerequisites?"

If the American people wised up and learned to look at reality and have the backbone to do what needs doing, yes. Unfortunately, our society has been emasculated, indoctrinated, and brainwashed to the point where they are more concerned about who wins on (the tv show ) Survivor than they are with the survival of their country.

"Not a chance in hell, would such ever be entertained by any Western Government or people, nor could it work."

We rounded up the Japanese during WWII, did we not? Many of the Founding Fathers and many of our presidents up to and including Lincoln himself advocated and campaigned for rounding up blacks and shipping them back to Africa. Nobody likes to face those facts though. Anything can be done, if the will to do it is there. And it would certainly 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."

I am not concerned with other countries, only my own. And in America the percentage is something like 0.6% Muslim. Nowhere near 10%.

"Sorry, if that offended you."

It didn't offend me, I just found it inaccurate and thus uncalled for.

"But reading the various responses, I could not help sensing a very negative, paranoid, highly emotional attitude towards the topic, to say the least."

First, one should be highly emotional about the issue. We are, after all, talking about the future of our country and freedom worldwide. We are talking about the lives of our children and grandchildren. Apathy is the problem, not emotion. And it is not a paranoia on our part, but rather an intelligently thought out response to a clear and present danger, a threat that we understand all too well.

"If that is not hatemongering - what is?"

Hatemongering is hating something or someone for no reason. Hating African Americans simpy for being black, for example. Hating an evil ideology such as Islamism and wanting to destroy it is not hatemongering. If Muslims reformed their religion and became peaceful and civilized, I would welcome them with open arms, just as I would welcome with open arms those Mexicans who come here to assimilate and become actual Americans while strongly opposing illegal aliens who come here to subvert.

"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?"

Not really. What would be truly refreshing would be if people ditched the political correctness nonsense and started telling it like it is, minus the sugar coating and hypersensitive euphemisms. Islam is a death cult, period. It worships death. Muslims pray for death, they idolize and martyr their own children when they engage in acts of barbarity, committing all sorts of atrocities. It does no one any good to call it a "religion of peace" or even a "religion" at all.

"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."

First, the word you are looking for is "libel", not "slander". In most legal systems, statements must be false, as well as harmful, to be considered "defamatory" (which applies to both slander and libel). Some jurisdictions also require that the statement must not only be true, but also in the public interest in order to avoid being slanderous or libelous.

Considering that, none of my statements are either slanderous or libelous. They are provably true, they are in the public interest (ie it serves the public good for those facts to be known).

In specifically American law, for a statement to be considered libelous or slanderous, the statement must be proven to be untruthful and it must also clearly be made with "actual malice", ie knowledge of falsity or with reckless disregard for the truth.

Once again, my statements pass the test and are not slanderous nor libelous.

"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?""

You do not understand the difference there. It is one thing to come to America, learn to speak English, assimilate into our culture, and swear allegiance to America. A migratory attack is a term I coined to define what is being committed by both Muslims and Mexicans here in America. In both cases, there is a refusal to assimilate, there is a higher allegiance to a foreign country than to America, a disregard for our laws and ways of life, and an inherent intent to force their ways over ours. Those actions are in no way similar to immigrants who come here legally to become Americans.

"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?"

I take it you've never heard of LaRaza, MeCha, and the Aztlan movement.

"All immigrants who came in large numbers planned to take the host country over?"

Not all immigrants, but several distinct groups, yes.

"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."

I see that you're ignorant of reality and current events. Perhaps you need to look more closely at LaRaza, Mecha, the Aztlan Movement, etc. Perhaps you need to look at the polls that show the vast majority of Mexicans (both legal and illegal) in America considering themselves primarily and first Mexicans, and not Americans. Perhaps you need to look at the illegal tactics these people use to be here, and how they disrespect our laws, our culture, our people.

As Frank Drebin said: "Truth hurts. Not as much as jumping on a bicycle without a seat, but it hurts."

:-)

"Sorry to be sarcastic, Noah, just not feasible – hence let's talk about somewhat pragmatic solutions."

It is feasible. It simply takes people willing to do what needs doing. Unlikely, but feasible and workable. Also effective in the extreme.

"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."

The problem is lack of motivation. Where will the lazy masses in America get motivation from? I suspect we'd need a nuclear terrorist attack on an American city to shake John Q. Public out of his hyponotic, television induced trance.

"Assuming that your quote is true, I laugh it up as oddity or joke."

Again, a dangerous stance to take when dealing with such subversives.

"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."

Wrong. It must be taken seriously, and it is a risk. This is a perfect example of both the erosion of our culture and the revisionist history and propaganda that is emasculating and stupefying our people. The problem is that most people are both too stupid and too preoccupied to realize that he's engaging in revisionist history. They'll vote for him again simply because he's black, Muslim, and a Democrat, just like they did the first time...mindlessly and by force of habit.

"The real and serious test is the first Western Country with a Muslim Majority, not one single individual in public office."

We can't afford such a test. Are you willing to sacrifice an entire civilized country simply because you're too stubborn to acknowledge reality? Look at Israel and Britain, two free countries where Muslims enjoy more freedom than they would in any Islamic country on earth. And look at how they act there. Why do you persist in denying reality? Does it scare you? It should! However, the proper response is not to deny it, but rather to confront it.

Please answer the following question either with an example or with a response of "I refuse to or am unable to respond to that".

Show me an Islamic country, or any country where Muslims dominate, where there is no problem with terrorism, where rape is not rampant, where freedom and education are not stifled and suppressed, where religious intolerance is not rampant, where murder is not glorified, and where conditions compare to civilized western countries.

Can you manage that?

We don't need put the future of our country and our children at stake for the sake of a silly, misguided, unnecessary, and dangeous experiment.

"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."

The issue is not whether Sharia law is instituted. Remember, in the investigation of the Islamic terror murder of Theo Van Gogh (for making a film critical of Islam), they uncovered an Islamic network dedicated to destroying their government. Muslim leaders there refused to shake the hand of their Intergration Minister because she is a woman. This is how Islam acts towards other countries. The first stage is to effect mass migration and become a powerful demographic force. The second is to exert both political influence through that demograpic force and via intimidation and force, taking advantage of the weak will of most westerners. The final result is a defacto or outright Islamic take-over.

"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."

I already covered that. Those silent Muslims who refuse to reform their religion, who sit by idly while their fellow Muslims enact terror and devastation, and who support such actions via monetary, emotional, or political support are just as guilty as the actual terrorists lighting the bombs. We have seen that most Muslims are both silent on the issue, and also supporting in one way or another of terrorism.

"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."

Again, I have covered this repeatedly. Why do you insist on going over it again and again? I don't feel like wasting time repeating myself anymore. Go back and re-read my earlier responses that explain why they are not committing suicide bombings and other daily atrocities here in America.

"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."

I'm not saying it's not possible, I am saying that it would be ineffective. We would literally have to bug the homes of Muslims and the various Muslim mosques, maddrassahs, restaurants, etc. And when we heard their hate speech, we'd have to deport them anyway. I say just skip the whole drawn out messy extra step and just get on with the deportation. They've had more than half a decade since 9/11 to reform their religion and nothing has been done. Let them get out, go back to their Islamic countries, reform their religion, then talk to us about being allowed to return.

"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."

The problem is, we do not have the time. I fear only a very ugly and bloody revolution can save America from ultimate decay, and even then we have very little time for such a revolution to be effective.

"I agree with you on the illegal immigration. Mexico being engaged in a subversive migratory attack is a conspiracy theory you can not prove."

I can indeed prove it. Mexico refuses to do anything about the illegal mass migration. The government of Mexico (and now our own government as well!) is complicit in this crime by actually aiding the illegals and giving them aid, advice, and assistance. The Mexican military is even helping! Illegal aliens and the money the send back to Mexico is their country's #1 source of income, topping even oil sales and tourism. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to put two and two together. Especially when you have Mexican politicians publicly stating that Mexico will take over the USA.

"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's not too simplistic. There are plenty of Christians living in abject poverty with no hope, yet we don't see them becoming international terrorists, do we? What about the Tibetan Buddhists? They don't engage in terrorism against the world in response to the crushing poverty and suppression imposed on them by China. Once again, the seed is Islam.

"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."

Once again, Islam is the issue. If these so-called "moderate" Muslims want to be judged differently and independantly of the terrorists, then they need to dissociate from and denounce terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism. They need to force reform on their religion. Otherwise, they are just as much a part of the problem as the actual terrorists.

"The conflict, as we see it today , is a mess, we created, hence we have a moral obligation to help resolve it."

Wrong again. That mess was created because the Muslims were patholocially opposed to the Jews having their own homeland in a traditionally Jewish land. The arabs were greedy, racist, and intolerant. That is where and why the conflict started. Compare the amount of land Israel occupies to the amount of land that Transjordan (now Jordan), Saudi Arabia, and other Muslim countries got in that deal. The Muslims simply do not understand the concept of peaceful coexistence. Never have. Never will.

"How? – I am clueless, as that car sits so deeply in the sand, it would take a mammoth to pull it out."

I'll tell you how. By moving all the so-called Palestinians back to their original country, Jordan. By killing all the terrorists and terror supporters in Israel. By letting those Muslim countries know that any attack on Israel will result in a retaliatory genocide against the Muslim countries involved. As much as they worship death, they still fear non-existence.

"Once again you tell me, why it ain't gonna work and then stop there without a constructive idea."

I'll give you a constructive answer. We immediately stop all aid to Muslim countries (humanitarian aid, monetary aid, military aid, etc). Not a single penny, not a single bullet, not a single vial of medicine or even a Band-Aid goes to them. We back Israel fully and without apology. We inform the Muslims that they must reform their religion and become civilized if they want to ever have anything to do with the west. We deport all Muslim from our country and force them to go reform their own homelands along with their religion. We inform them that any major act of Islamic terror against the West will automtically result in the immediate, mandatory, and unhesistant annihilation of Islamic "holy sites" and population centers. Riyadh, Tehran, Amman, the Aswan Dam, etc. The only thing Muslims love is their religion, and if we take out their holy sites and their population centers, their religion becomes non-existent. That they fear.

"The Marshall plan and substantial rebuilding support after only a generation led to a populus we proudly called allies."

I'd hardly consider the Germans our "allies" considering how often they vote against us and undermine our efforts in the UN. They vote against us 45% of the time and have undermined our efforts in recent years by allying with Saddam in secret along with France and Russia. America has few true allies in the world.

"Why not try that and follow through with Jordan or Turkey?"

We have also funneled BILLIONS of dollars into Egypt, and that has not changed their anti-American hatred one bit. Fully 88% of Jordanians last year said they support violence against civilians. Why associate with such monsters?

"Why not give it a chance to let Turkey integrate with the EU and start some form of positive domino theory?"

You're naive in the extreme to believe that Turkey deserves EU status. Turkey committed the Armenian genocide (1.5 - 2 MILLION dead) and that's why Turkey is now mainly Muslim. The best-selling books in Turkey are Mein Kampf and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. That tells us something! Turkey is an Islamic nightmare just waiting to explode.

"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."

Sad, isn't it?

"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)"

I've lost my faith in Israel. They seem to be doing everything in their power to destroy themselves. I fear they simply will not have the backbone to pull the trigger when it needs pulling.

"Saudi Arabia is as decadent as any western country. The regime could easily be toppled from within."

Yes, but the regime is all that stands between its current state and it becoming an open enemy to the USA. If the fat-cat rich Arabs running the place are removed, then the country will fall into openly radical hands and will become an even more virulent enemy than it already is. The Saudi royalty is the cap on the powderkeg.

" They could be pressured in many ways to perhaps reform to some sort of constitutional monarchy a la UK."

In ways such as what?

"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."

We should give Syria a warning to stop interfering in Iraq, and when they don't we should nuke them off the map. They have no defenses and would make a nice, convenient, easy example to the rest of the Islamic world that we mean business. Still, it would be better to take out a major player like Iran or Saudi Arabia first.

---

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".