Europes botched civilization
Europes botched civilization, perverted by socialism and lost faith, seems to have lost the will, the passion to sustain itself. If it continues to practice todays multiculturalist leftism, Europes demographic doom will be sealed. Some harbingers:
In Brussels, Belgium, the most popular name for baby boys is now Mohammad. Sustaining the population of a nation requires that on average each couple gives birth to 2.1 children. The average European couple now has fewer than 1.4 babies, compared to 3.6 babies born to the average Muslim immigrant couple in Europe. Across Western Europe 16 to 20 percent of babies are being born into Muslim families.
In France at least 12 percent of the population is already Muslim, the fruits mostly of immigrants from former French colonies in North Africa. If present birth trends continue, by 2030 a quarter of Frances people will be Muslim, more than enough to determine who controls the national parliament and executive. As this columnist recently noted, the nuclear-armed French military is already 15 percent Muslim. Adjacent Switzerland is now 20 percent Muslim.
The German newspaper Deutsche Welle days ago reported that Germanys birth rate in 2005 fell to a level lower than at the end of World War II, to a historic low,� more than fifty percent lower than those of France and Great Britain. But at a meeting this week in Berlin that brought together the interior ministers of six European nations, Germany�s leftwing Social Democrats continued to oppose the application of any test or standard that would restrict who could migrate into Germany.
The burgeoning Muslim population within Europe is not evenly spread. It is largely concentrated in and around big cities, whose local politicians feel its pressure acutely and often bend to that pressure. In the Netherlands the cities of Amsterdam and Rotterdam nearly have Muslim majorities now.
The best way to use the Quran
These Islamic enclaves are already taking on the character of conquered provinces that no longer belong to the European countries around them. As FrontPage Magazine recently quoted from the new book While Europe Slept by liberal American expatriate Bruce Bawer:
In France, a public official met with an imam at the edge of Roubaix�s Muslim district out of respect for his declaration of the neighborhood as Islamic territory to which she had no right of access. In Britain, imams have pressed the government to officially designate certain areas of Bradford as being under Muslim, not British, law. In Denmark, Muslim leaders have sought the same kind of control over parts of Copenhagen. And in Belgium, Muslims living in the Brussels neighborhood of Sint-Jans-Molenbeek already view it not as part of Belgium but as an area under Islamic jurisdiction in which Belgians are not welcome.
Europe has several potential choices in the face of a flood of immigrants and families within its borders who refuse to assimilate European values of mutual toleration and liberal social policies.
Europe�s cultural polarization vis-�-vis its Muslim underclass is being exacerbated by socialist policies that are producing stagnant economies and high unemployment. These fruits of Euro-socialism have also created a political tinderbox of Muslim frustration and, as we saw in recent days of protests in Paris, an angry refusal by many traditional Europeans to reform or relinquish their welfare state and job security benefits. This climate discourages investors and pits new and traditional Europeans against one another.
If Europe continues as it is now, the rising Muslim tide will, one at a time, transform the members of the European Union into Islamic Republics under Islamic Shari�a law as Muslims become the majority population.
Already the wealth of traditional Europeans is being bled away and transferred to new Muslim immigrants and their children. One mechanism for this is the European welfare state. In Denmark, observed Bawer, only five percent of the population is Muslim, but this minority demands and receives 40 percent of the Danish government�s total welfare payments and other taxpayer-subsidized social benefits. Even the liberal New York Times Magazine in February reported on the social impact of this growing Islamic drain on the resources of European welfare states such as Sweden and Denmark.
Another method used to transfer wealth from Europeans to Eurabian Muslims is theft. Some radical Mullahs have told their European congregations that Islamic Shari�a law justifies shoplifting and other forms of stealing from European merchants and companies as a way to make non-Muslims pay the discriminatory jizya tax that is extracted from non-Muslim citizens in Muslim countries.
And in Europe�s growing Islamic neighborhoods, where police are often afraid to go, European law is being supplanted by Shari�a. European women venturing into or near such enclaves have been assaulted and, in some cases, raped by gangs of macho Islamic males for violating Muslim dress codes and failing to exhibit the subservient status some Islamic subcultures require of females.
Forty percent of Muslims living in Great Britain want Islamic Shari�a law introduced into parts of that country, according to a poll reported last month by the London Sunday Telegraph.
Shari�a differs dramatically from modern Western notions of law and society. Shari�a has no separation of church and state; to the contrary, under Shari�a the Koran is the ultimate law book and constitution, and the Islamic Mullah is the magistrate who punishes violators of this law. Under Shari�a, as practiced in much of the Islamic world, equality exists only among Muslim men; women are inferior to men, and Jews and Christians are inferior to all Muslims. Risk-taking and usury, i.e., money-lending for profit, are forbidden, so we would kiss capitalism goodbye.
Religious freedom is non-existent under Shari�a. A Christian or a Jew is permitted to convert to Islam, but the penalty for any Muslim converting to a different faith is death. In American-liberated Afghanistan a 41-year-old former Muslim, Abdul Rahman, is on trial in Kabul for the crime of converting to Christianity. The prosecutor in the case, Abdul Wasi, has asked for a death penalty, as Shari�a requires. Wasi, reported Associated Press, said that he �had offered to drop the charges if Rahman changed his religion back to Islam, but the defendant refused.� The Muslim judge�s ruling is expected by mid-May.
It seems worth asking American authorities whether the U.S. would intervene to prevent the execution of an Afghan whose only crime was converting to Christianity.
European Muslims demand toleration and respect and accommodation for their laws, garb, Halal (Islamic �Kosher�) dietary rules, customs, and faith. But as the world has seen in recent months, radical Muslims have no respect for Western traditions such as press freedom. Cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad set off riots, killings and death threats against European journalists.
(Oddly, as this columnist uniquely noted, the tradition prohibiting depictions of the Prophet began with Muhammad himself, who gave such guidance to avoid becoming an object of idolatry by misguided Muslims tempted to worship him instead of Allah. Logically, therefore, a devout Muslim should object to any positive depiction of Mohammad, but negative depictions of Mohammad, as in the European cartoons, pose no such danger of causing idol worship. It was the Islamists who fanatically objected to negative European cartoons of the Prophet who were practicing idolatry by turning Mohammad into an image too sacred to depict in any way.)
Islamic Shari�a is incompatible with Western traditions of tolerance. Too much of today�s Islam preaches �an eye for an eye� but not �live and let live.�
No wonder, then, that earlier this month the chairman of Britain�s Commission for Racial Equality, Trevor Phillips, responded to the Telegraph poll by urging the 40 percent of his nation�s Muslims who want part of the country ruled by Shari�a law to move elsewhere. �We have one set of laws� in Britain, said Phillips. �They are decided by one group of people, members of Parliament, and that�s the end of the story.� (In February Australia�s Federal Treasurer Peter Costello, said much the same, suggesting in a public speech that Shari�a advocates would feel more comfortable living in Saudi Arabia or Iran.)
Immigrant to Norway Iraqi Mullah Krekar, a former leader of the Kurdish guerrilla group Ansar-al-Islam, has told Norwegians that �our way of thinking�will prove more powerful than yours� and described Al Qaeda terror mastermind Osama bin Laden as �a good person.� This prompted Norway�s Minister of Labor and Social Inclusion Bjarne Hakon Hanssen to say he intended to deport Mullah Krekar back to Iraq in the near future. Selective deportation of such radical Islamist firebrands (such as those who inspired recent Muslim terrorism in London) across Europe could reduce immediate social tensions.
What Europe is doing in the meanwhile is preaching the need for press freedom and tolerance while preparing this June to prosecute, in Paris, famed Italian journalist Orianna Fallaci for daring to write a book, The Force of Reason, critical of the Muslim immigrant inundation of Europe. In today�s Europe free speech is stifled by laws that prohibit Political Incorrectness in a wide and arbitrary variety of ways.
And France, at the heart of Europe, is promoting trade barriers with a dogmatic zeal not seen since the frenzy of stone castle building in the dark ages. In the name of preserving national security, as Daniel Schwammenthal reported in the March 13 Wall Street Journal, France last winter declared 11 of its industrial sectors off limits to purchase by investors from other European nations; these sectors, noted Schwammenthal, range �from data security to (bizarrely) casinos.� What might become of France if its dice and roulette wheels became Dutch�or Russian?
France is also dragging its feet on agreements to allow European Union workers to move freely from one EU country to another. The French have phobias not only about Muslim peasant immigrants but also about what they call the �Polish plumber,� the skilled European workers who would move to Paris and undercut the high pay now pocketed by scarce French workers. The French incentive to work is dulled by an easy, lazy alternative: a fat welfare check.
If Europe can somehow buy time, then in theory it might be able to make a comeback. What it needs is cloning and fertility technology, moxie, imports of its old sturdier, healthier genetic material from the United States and Australia to restore its seminal vigor, and a renewal of faith. Europe was able to restore its lost population rather quickly after the Black Plague and spawned Baby Booms after two World Wars.
Political policies could facilitate this. When France was unable to recruit many settlers to its colony called New France, now known as Canada, it offered fat pensions to any married couple there that had six children. Quebec to this day retains the spirit of fecundity those pensions bred.
Last September French Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin proposed accelerating cash benefits to encourage women to have a third child. This is yet another kind of slacker welfare, but at least it encourages the lazy to spend more time breeding and less watching television. De Villepin did not propose restricting these or other government breeder benefits to non-Muslims, although he could have made the argument that non-Muslim French are an endangered species meriting special help.
Europe has stopped rising Islamic tides before, in battle in southern France in 732 by the knights of Charles Martel, �The Hammer,� and twice at the gates of Vienna in 1529 and 1683 by holding off the Ottoman Turks. Spain even rolled back its Muslim occupiers with the Reconquista of 1492, and Greece, the cradle of Western democracy, won back its independence from Muslim rule in 1829.
In time Islam will and should collapse, as Communism did. To help this happen a courageous European stand against that nest of Islamist vipers and their atomic eggs in Teheran would be a good chance for Europe to demonstrate to itself and to the world that it has the will and skill to annihilate its enemies as it did in 732 and 1683, and survive.
Complete rejection of the Enemy�s Outlook was an essential ingredient in warfare
The reason why the Franks, the Spanish and the Austrians (as also the Byzantines before them) could repel the Muslim invaders at different times in history was that they had a complete disdain for the enemy�s outlook. They looked upon the enemy as barbarians (which they in fact were). And with this disdain for the enemy they went to battle. The battle was half won, since it was already won in the mind. They never had the appeasement of the enemy in their minds as had Chamberlain for Hitler or as have Jacques Chirac,, Gerhard Schroeder and to an extent even Tony Blair and George Bush (when he declares Islam to be religion of peace).. The franks the Spanish and Austrians went to battle with a firm conviction that the enemy has to be defeat and destroyed, if the civilized way of life had to survive.
A Forward policy necessary in battling Islam
With the battle already won in the mind due to a total contempt for the enemy, the Franks, Spanish and Austrians, could follow a forward policy while battling Islam. The enemy was given no quarter, and after the initial Muslim attack, they did not wait for the Muslims to fall upon them. On the contrary, they followed a forward policy of attacking the Muslims when they least expected and when they were at a disadvantage. This was an important reason for their success against the Muslims..
An Ideological battle with those committed to theology inspired warfare is futile
The Franks, Spanish and Austrians (as also the Byzantines) could stand against the Muslims with conviction, since they knew that it was futile to try to negotiate with the Muslims (at least when the Muslims had the upper hand in battle). The only language that the Muslim understood was that of blood and death. In the annals of the Muslim attack on Christendom, there is no mention of any Christian King surrendering himself to a Muslim conqueror and embracing Islam as a price of his freedom. There were Christian Traitor of course, who for the sake of petty gain, went over to the Muslims for petty gain, (Count Julian of Visigothic Spain is one example). But they were exceptions, that proved the rule to be otherwise. All Christian kings and also the armies and the play population preferred fight or flight, rather than surrender and the ignominy of conversion to Islam. It was only those who were unfortunate enough to fall to the hand of the conquering Muslims who had to submit to Islam at the point of the sword and became Muslims at the pain of death.
Taking the war to the enemy�s civilian population was the trump card to a lasting victory
Christianity was never spread at the point of the sword, and no conversion were effected at the pain of death. But when the Muslim invaders were rolled back after a few centuries of occupation, the Christian re-conquistadors followed a pragmatic policy of taking the war to the civilian Muslim population (many of who were originally Christian) to either embrace Christianity, or leave the Christian lands or to be put to the sword. This ruthless policy, ensured that there remained no hostile population in Christian lands, who would betray the Christian army or in peacetimes sabotage the nation by acting as a Muslim fifth column in Christendom. Today the situation is reversed with the large and ever growing Muslim populations in Europe and the USA. Today rulers have forgotten the enlightened policy of our forebears of the days of the reconquista and the crusades. An enemy is an enemy, regardless of whether he is in the armed forces of the enemy or is loyal to the enemy by reason of being a co-religionist of the enemy. Thus an enemy civilian is also an enemy. This is the harsh reality, that Americans and Europeans need to face. If they refuse to face it, there would be many more Theo Van Gough�s in the near future in Europe, Australia, USA and the rest of the Western world. The fifth column that the Muslims populations in the West are represent a heaven sent sanctuaries for the terrorists to whom the ordinary Muslims are loyal. We need be under no delusion that the Muslims in the West are loyal to the country in which they live. No way. They are loyal to Islam and hence to Islamic terrorism. The Muslim in the West are vipers whom the Western countries have chosen to nurture on their bosom, a mistake that the enlightened kings of the yore did never make. The argument today is that the world has changed, we no longer live in medieval times. Yes sir you are right. But it is the Western world that has changed. The Muslims still live in medieval times and nurture a blood feud with the West. If this outlook is not recognized and countered with means that are far more ruthless than the ruthlessness and cruelty that the Muslims embody, there is a very dangerous future ahead for Western civilization. We hope today�s Western leaders open their eyes to reality, before it is too late in our battle against the Islamic Jihad.
If we are to succeed in the fight against Islam we also need to realize the nature of Islam.
Getting into Islam was a one way street.
Islam was a dead end, where you could enter, (in fact you were forced to enter at the pain of death) , but could never leave, since you would be killed. In fact such was the indoctrination and mass hysteria that Mohammed (yimach shmo�) started, that in a generation or so, the new converts forgot that their forefathers were not Muslims, and in fact in North Africa, they even forgot that they were not Arabs. They forgot that their forefathers were made to submit to Islam at the pain of death.
This sealed the fate of all those who were forced to embrace Islam from ever becoming decent thinking humans ever again.
Only the total destruction of non-Muslim heritage and wholesale slaughter of non-Muslims has got the Muslims Victory
With every Muslim military victory, there was not just a change of ruler, but a wholesale slaughter of those who refused to convert or pay Jaziya. There was also a total destruction of the pre-Islamic culture, educational institution, libraries, etc. The planned and deliberately implemented slaughter of the non-Muslim priestly and warrior class was done to enfeeble the conquered populace so much that they would forget who they were their national and cultural identity be subsumed under a newly imposed Arabized Muslim identity.
This kind of tyranny was never known to the human race, with any other conqueror, like Alexander, Julius Caesar, Hannibal, or even those who came after the Muslims like the British Colonialists, or the Spanish Conquistadors. Yes the Spanish Conquistadors were ruthless, but in spite of all they did to he native Americans, the na�ve Americans still have preserved their memory of they being a people different from the Spanish Conquistadors, not so with the Egyptians, North Africans, Berbers, et al.
Ask any Egyptian who he is, he will say he is an Arab, were the Pharaohs Arabs? Were the builders of the Pyramids, Arab? Ask any Libyan, Sudanese, Algerian, Tunisian, Somalian, who he is he will say he is an Arab. These are people, whom the conquering Muslim Arab, so Arabized that they have forgotten who they are, their national identities have completely been submerged into the Arab Muslim Ummah.
This has not happened with the native Americans or the Maoris or the Africans, in spite of the fact that apartheid was practiced in South Africa. The Arabs as conquerors totally brainwashed at the point of the sword all the conquered people, Arabized and Islamized them at the pain of death.
Knowing all this is relevant today for those who seek to defeat Islam. To do so we have to first understand the depth of depravity in Islam. If the Muslims have to be saved from Islam, then it is not sufficient to conquer the Muslim countries and try to being democracy to them, we have to de-Islamize these people, if they are to be emancipated into civilized beings.
Islam has brutalized them and made them robotic followers and into robotic killers, narrow-minded individuals, despotic rulers, and cruel sadists by following the injunctions of the Instruction Manual of Terrorism (the Quran). This is proven by the bloodied Shiite-Sunni murders that have started in Iraq despite elections, and elections by people who support a murderous creed throw up murders as their legislators as in the case of Hamas and the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.
Islam is a perverted mentality, a mental sickness based on intimidation to convert all non-Muslims to Islam, and to murder if you refuse to convert. And if you manage to save your head, then you have to live under their dehumanizing tyranny and live as non-Muslims (Dhimmis or Zimmis).
The Retrograde Negative Spirit of Islam pervades all across that Islamic civilization(sic). Although to call it �civilization� is a contradiction in terms
The very first verse uttered by that lecherous mass-murderer, the accursed Mohammed-ibn-abdallah was �La Ilah Il Allah, Mohammed ur Rasoolallah� which translated literally would read �No god but god, Mohammed is prophet of god�. In Arabic �La� connotes �No�. So what can one expect from a mentality whose very first of its five principles is based on negativism?
Negativism permeates all through Islam, its attitudes towards all non-Muslims, its use of dishonesty to portray itself as a victim, its murderous intent towards all those who refuse to convert to Islam, its use of any level of cruelty to Islamize entire humankind.
We can save ourselves from this Malignant Madness of Islam, only if we see it through to its grave. The other option is landing in the grave ourselves along with liberty, progress and free-thinking, freedom of speech and scientific advancement, all of which will be become slaves to that Instruction Manual of Hate and Terror � the Quran.
Why is a threat of death the only way to defeat Islam?
Islam was spread with the use of death threats. The defeated non-Muslims were given the choice of Islam or Death. After having been forced to accept Islam through such terminal coercion, the converted people had no way of renouncing Islam. If they did so, they were targeted as Murtads (apostates) and were killed. It is mandatory in Islam for Muslims to kill anyone who leaves the cult. So the converts were forced to remain Muslims. And as this was their fate, then the best bet for them was to imbibe the murderous attitude themselves and impose it on others.
Today although "Islam or Death" is not possible openly, unless you live in Muslim ruled countries of the Islamic crescent like Egypt, Sudan, Iran, Pakistan or in areas contiguous to Muslim majority areas like Malaku in Indonesia, Southern Sudan, Kashmir, North Nigeria.
Muslim converts today are convicts or psychological wrecks like Jose Padilla and Richard Reid
But the Muslims have devised ingenious methods to reach those best suited for Islam, so they evangelize in Prisons, where they can appeal to the dregs of society, or those come from broken families, those who have gone through divorces, or those who have had some heart-breaking personal experience.
It is on the emotions of such unfortunate wrecks and irredeemable convicts that these Muslim missionaries prey like vultures and hyenas to make them join the murderous ranks of Islam. Richard Reid, the Shoe bomber, Jose Padilla are specimen of those who become Muslim today.
The cardinal fact is that across the fourteen centuries of Islam�s existence, it has been its death threat that made people Muslim and it was the same death threat that kept them Muslim. The same death threats are used today to intimate Ayan Hirsi Ali, Salman Rushdie and many others like them to keep them from speaking the truth about Islam.
He who was born by the sword shall die by the sword
Modifying the age-old adage �He who lives by the sword shall die by the sword.� We can say that �Islam which was born by the sword shall die by the sword� As it was a death threat that made people into Muslims and kept them as Muslims, the only way these scum can be shaken out of their adherence to the savagery called Islam is a death threat. Not individual death threats as the Muslims hurl today at Hirsi and Salman, but a death threat of extermination through a nuclear holocaust of the entire Muslim population across the globe!
Only when the beastlike Muslims see the determination of a world to do them in, upto their last man and woman, can the Ummah of Islam be smashed.
When the Muslims see that there is no option other than death, if they persist in remaining Muslim, will the fort of Islam be breached and once the first trickle of Muslims who renounce Islam starts, the trickle will turn into a flood and an avalanche that will wipe out Islam.
Yes there will certainly be many Muslims who will try to kill those who renounce Islam, but when these murderers are themselves hunted down with equal ferocity, will the lay Muslims believe that it is safe for them to give up Islam. Then and only then, shall we see Muslims coming over in droves to give up Islam. But this can happen only after we seriously hurl and start executing a death threat of mass killing of all Muslims across the globe. There are no soft options here.
Do we have it in us to do that?
The answer decides whether civilization wins or Islam wins!
The Paradox of the death seeking psychology of Islam
This very death seeking psychology of Islam is also the behind their wanting to become suicide (genocide) bombers today. Any power that wants to defeat this death-seeking psychology, will have to be a death-giving one. Since Muslims want martyrdom, so only those who can give them this martyrdom fast and on a mass scale can overcome this delinquent psychology of the Muslims. The roots of Islam are psychological, and only one who understand this psychology, can overcome it.
Islam is a psychology of perpetual war. A psychology that had existed among the pre-Islamic Bedouin Arabs. But then, before Islam, this psychology was not a global problem, since the Arabs fought amongst themselves. With Islam this psychology was inbuilt into religion and infused with a zeal to impose this psychology on all those who were weak enough to fall before Muslim swords. As long as Islam has other religions on this globe, the war Jihad, will go on till the whole world is Islamized. But in the unlikely event of the entire world being Islamized, will this violence stop? No Never. Then in that global Dar-ul-Islam, Muslims would fight amongst themselves Shias against Sunnis, Iranians against Iraqis, Arabs against non-Arabs and so on. Herein lies the paradox of Islam. As long as Islam is surrounded by other religions, there will be violence, but even after, and if at all, Islam is alone on this globe, there will still be endless violence, till Islam is put to an end.
Islam has a senseless and unmanageable agenda, with other religions, while they are not sensible, at least they are manageable. Other religions also bear animosity against each other, but they can be sobered down and made to co-exist with each other, as do Judaism, Christianity, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, Shintoism, Hinduism, Animism, etc.
But Islam defies, being civilized, and being made manageable. And it will defy till its violent end. Before Islam burst upon the world, all other religions had made the world non-sensible, but it is Islam that has made religion unmanageable, Had Islam not been around, it would not have been necessary to think in terms of the demise of religion itself. It is Islam that is forcing and will continue to force humankind away from religion. While non-Islamic religions made man into a delinquent, who kept muttering to himself, Islam has made man into a delinquent who has gone violently berserk, The delinquent has now to be shot a tranquilizer and then given a strong sedative to sober him up, so that mankind can bury the delinquent behavior of religion which Islam has made criminal, and after which humankind can continue its march of knowledge and science to plant the banner of humanity across the universe, and not waste its energies in fighting against itself in the narrow confines of planet earth.