This immigration is not to a romanticized melting pot wherein newcomers gratefully search for opportunities for a better life in liberty and freely offer their talents and loyalty to benefit their new homeland.
Shem’s latest cartoon. You like?
By Janet Levy
Within the past few decades, mosques have increasingly dotted the landscapes of American and European cities and towns, with mega mosques often overshadowing adjacent, centuries-old churches in predominantly Christian regions.Â Islamic schools or academies and a host of Muslim organizations have become omnipresent across the West.
Meanwhile, Americans and Europeans have made countless accommodations to Muslim demands. They have included footbaths; high-decibel, five-times-daily calls to prayer; segregated male-female gym and swimming pool hours; halal food; workplace dispensations for handling pork products and for female head and face coverings; and special, public prayer rooms. Also, shari’ah-compliant financial transactions, the expunging of offensive likenesses of Mohammed or imagined depictions of Arabic characters that connote “Allah,” official swearings-in on Korans in place of customary Bibles, the neutralizing of official descriptive language about Islamists and the jihad, the revision of so-called offensive content in movies and television programs, the removal of representations of pigs from the public sphere, and many other acculturations to Muslim entreaties have all been made in the service of respecting Muslim religious beliefs and practices.
To those in Western democracies, these accommodating actions appear, on the surface, to be little more than harmless civil gestures, respecting the needs of a growing religion in their midst and welcoming a new addition to their proud, multicultural tradition.Â Many Westerners pat themselves on the back for their liberal bent, their tolerance and their open-mindedness.
- U.K.: Non-Muslims told to don “burkinis” and other “modest” attire to swim during “Muslim” swimming sessions
- Nigeria: Jihadists demolish 20 churches, murder three pastors
- Kenyan Christians fight inclusion of Sharia courts in new constitution: It would mean “one religion has been elevated above others”
- Female American Marines Don Headscarves in Afghanistan…
- Tim Blair:Â HOLLAND GOES MO
- Fun with Numbers (and the Muslim Council of Britain)
Little do they realize that this strategic pattern of demands is part of an insidious, 1,400-year-old proscription for Muslims that originates in the Koran and the Sunnah, the deeds of Mohammed.Â It is the Hijra or doctrine of immigration. Modeled by Mohammed’s migration from Mecca to Medina, this immigration is not to a romanticized melting pot wherein newcomers gratefully search for opportunities for a better life in liberty and freely offer their talents and loyalty to benefit their new homeland.Â This is immigration for Islamic expansionism employing ethnic separatism to gain special status and privileges within the host country.Â Hijra is immigration designed to subvert and subdue non-Muslim societies and pave the way for eventual, total Islamization.
In their compelling book, “Modern Day Trojan Horse:Â The Islamic Doctrine of Immigration,” authors Sam Solomon, a former professor of shari’ah law and convert to Christianity, and Elias Al Maqdisi, an expert on Islamic teachings, explain the migration of Muslims to the Dar-al-Harb, the “land of war,” as a religious edict with a basis in Islamic doctrine.Â They delineate the step-by-step process of this 1,400-year-old strategy of conquest. It is a transitional strategy which they characterize as the most important step in spreading Islam and preparing for jihad.Â From their carefully delineated treatise on Hijra, it is clear that migration in concert with military conquest comprise the bookends of Islamic expansionism.
Solomon and Al Maqdisi review the phases of the Hijra and its juristic or legal basis in Islamic doctrine.Â Under the cover of taquiya or deception, the step-by-step methodology of the migration process is designed to subdue, then, subjugate the host culture, culminating in implementation of shari’ah law.
The beginning phase of Islamization usually includes activities pivotal to building a physical presence. It consists of public calls to prayer; founding of schools, libraries and research centers; and the teaching of Arabic — actions that appear to be reasonable and respectable infrastructure requirements necessary to support the presence of a faith.Â At this point in the Hijra, it is permissible for Muslims to engage in haram, or forbidden actions, out of necessity to establish and empower the umma or Muslim community.Â Koranic rules such as the prohibition against friendships with infidels are suspended while the objectives of future Islamization are systematically put into place. In its initial phase, the Hijra passes scrutiny by the West whose citizens erroneously view the migration as mainly economic — a pilgrimage for a better life.
Solomon and Maqdisi examine the comprehensive strategy that begins with the establishment of the umma or Muslim community. The mosque becomes the locus of power, a strategic base and the center of all activities.Â They explain how in this embryonic phase, a top priority is the scouting for new arrivals to expand and empower the existing Muslim community.Â Muslim leaders offer solicitous assistance and helpful suggestions for schools, housing, mosque worship, halal markets and other services to ingratiate themselves with new arrivals and bring them into the local Muslim community.Â Agents of local mosques, ever alert for new immigrants and potential converts, engage in subtle forms of indoctrination and police local Muslims.
Holland’s boyz named Moe
Clueless headline of the week appeared in theÂ Age, above an item on “Mohammed” becoming theÂ most popular boy’s name in Holland’s four largest cities:
DUTCH EMBRACE ISLAMIC NAME
“Seriously,” emails reader Cuckoo, “theÂ Age seems to think that Henk and Geerte Vanderclog are now choosing to call their boy this.”
UPDATE. “Embrace Me, My Sweet Embraceable Mo” â€“ further on Europe’s Mo-dification fromÂ Mark Steyn.
Urban Regeneration Minister Fadela Amara told the Financial Times that a veil covering everything but the eyes represented “the oppression of women”.
Ms Amara said she was “in favour of the burka not existing in my country” …
“The burka represents not a piece of fabric but the political manipulation of a religion thatÂ enslaves women and disputes the principal of equality between men and women, one of the founding principles of our republic,” she said.
Ms Amara is aÂ Muslim herself.
A poster on Bolt nails it:
What we are witnessing is the Third World takeover of the West. And, sadly, the situation here in Australia is particularly dire.
We can see it on the streets of our cities. For example, I live in Melbourne and have noticed a dramatic shift in the ethnic makeup of the city in recent years. I had a particularly revealing experience recently when I went to the Immigration Department to research some documents. Unfortunately, I couldn’t go inside due to a Third World multitude, a queue of many people that went out into the street! There were Muslim women with their faces covered. How do you identify them with the faces covered? There were Africans, Indians, Pakistanis and Arabs. It was like a market, full of people trying to live in Australia! Even the Immigration employees were foreigners.
Australia, it seems, is rapidly being transformed into a colony of the Third World. We have effectively lost control over our borders and our own destiny as a nation. And, worse still, nobody seems to care, especially not our so-called political “leaders”, all of whom have shown that they are complicit in the Third World immigrant invasion of Australia. Lincoln (Reply)