If you have Muslims inside the gates, or on your borders, then you have Jihad

Christina McIntosh  on Daniel Pipes dreamy Islam vs “political” Islam, or “radical” Islam, or all these other kinds that one cannot possibly separate from the really thing:

Pipes reports: “… the coalition issued the following statement, important because it clearly distinguishes between political Islam and the religion of Islam..”. Such a ‘distinguishing’ is a distinction without a difference. Islam is Islam is Islam. It was not ‘political Islam’ that Winston Churchill called “the religion of blood and war”, but.. Islam, itself. Jacques Ellul, in his discussion of jihad, prefaced to Bat Yeor’s “The Decline of Eastern Christianity Under Islam” (NOT, one might note, “The Decline of Eastern Christianity Under Political Islam”), says – of Islam, Islam, ISLAM, that it is “fundamentally warlike”. Surely Daniel Pipes has read Churchill, and Ellul, on the subject of Islam. Surely he knows what John Quincy Adams said of it, back in the day: discussing not something nasty called ‘political Islam’ that can be distinguished from something else that isn’t nasty, or is not quite so nasty, called ‘the religion of Islam’, but.. .Islam, pur et dur. And perhaps he should – if he has not already – read Conor Cruise O’Brien, who said bluntly, in “The Lesson of Algeria: Islam is Indivisible”, “Fundamentalist Islam” (or, pace Mr Pipes and others, “political Islam” – CM) is a misnomer which dulls our perception in a dangerous way. It does so by implying that there is some other kind of Islam, which is well disposed to those who reject the Koran. There isn’t. Islam is a universalist, triumphalist, and political religion. It claims de jure dominion over all humanity; that is God’s (sic: Allah’s – CM) will. The actual state of affairs, with unbelievers of various sorts dominating most of the world, is a suspension of God’s (sic: Allah’s – CM) will, and a scandal to the [Muslim] faithful.

The world is divided between the House of Islam, and the House of War, meaning, the rest of us….Jihad is defined as “the religious duty to wage war upon those who do not accept the doctrines of Islam’. The prophet mohamed himself not merely preached but waged jihad. God’s [sic: allah’s] word, dictated to the prophet and preached by him, is binding on all Muslims, and his example is their inspiration…. What is going on today in the Muslim world is not the advent of some aberrant thing called ‘Islamic fundamentalism’ [or, for that matter, ‘political Islam’ – CM] but a revival of Islam itself – the real thing… The jihad is back…”. More, from the lucid O’Brien – “The prophet mohamed did not offer his followers a chance to live in harmony with their neighbours. He taught them to fight their neighbours, if they were unbelievers, and kill them, or beat them into submission. And it is futile to say, of those Muslims who faithfully follow those teachings today, that their actions are ‘not intrinsically related to Islam”. We are facing an Islamic revival..”. Thus O’Brien in, of all places, the ‘Independent’, back in January 1995. Islam is.. Islam. And if you have Muslims inside the gates, then you have Jihad. So those persons, and parties, within Europe or any other majority-Infidel country anywhere in the world, who seek to expel from their midst Muslim colonies from which jihad is pullulating, and/ or prevent the entry of more Muslims into their lands, are seeking to put in practice elementary policies of self-preservation. they are exercising the precautionary principle. Got Muslims? Got Jihad. Only way not to have jihad waged within the gates by, for example, men with sharpened knives on Westminster Bridge or men driving trucks full tilt at terrified pedestrians on an esplanade in Nice, is… NOT to have Muslims inside the gates. The general ruck of the Ummah, the homes and mosques and madrasas and internet sites and the Islamised enclaves – like Molenbeek – from which the previously resident infidels are steadily and inexorably driven out, is the sheltering, nurturing sea within which those murderous jihadists swim and from which, ceaselessly and naturally, they emerge, whether as individuals or groups or.. a whole damn army. I wonder whether Pipes has ever read ex-Muslim Sam Solomon’s “Al-Hijra: The Islamic Doctrine of Immigration”?

Immigration and Islam in Austria

Daniel Pipes reports that an historic event that took place in Austria in December 2017 has gone largely unnoticed outside of Austria. For the first time in Western Europe a government with an anti-immigration and anti-Islamization policy (on paper at least) took power.

To summarize Pipes’ report:

The two parties that won 58 percent of the vote in Austria’s legislative elections are the Austrian Peoples Party (Österreichische Volkspartei, or ÖVP) and the Freedom Party of Austria (Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs, or FPÖ) – the former a mildly conservative entity and the latter with roots in the far-right shadowlands of German (not Austrian) nationalism.

On coming to power, the coalition issued the following statement – important because it clearly distinguishes between political Islam and the religion of Islam – and that is a new departure in mainstream politics:

Austria guarantees freedom of belief and religion but fights political Islam. By political Islam we mean groups and organizations whose ideological foundation is Islam, and which seek to change the basic political and social order by rejecting our constitution and Islamizing society. Political Islam, which can lead to radicalization, antisemitism, violence and terrorism, has no place in our society.

For someone like Pipes, who sees what he calls I&I (immigration and Islamization) as the key issue in the West’s future, a trip to Vienna was de rigueur.

So, he went, he saw, but left Vienna ‘nearly clueless’ as to whether or how this policy was to be implemented.  Although in an update later in the essay he notes that the government has initiated a proposal to ban the hijab in schools for girls under ten years of age, he has remained undecided as to whether or not this new coalition will actually ‘take steps’.  Several anti-Islamist activists he spoke to give their own reasons for skepticism:

  • ÖVP merely mouths anti-I&I positions but does not want to go beyond the European consensus. That means more of the same, nothing dramatic ahead.
  • The national government is quite hemmed in by the European Union, the bureaucracy, and the judiciary, all of which oppose anti-I&I steps. One interlocutor went so far as to call democracy in Austria “a farce.”
  • Beyond those three power centers, the entire Establishment of the 6Ps (the police, politicians, press, priests, professors and prosecutors) does not want changes.
  • The Austrian population, despite its resounding vote for anti-immigration policies, is not focused on this issue and is not riding the new government to do something.
  • The Muslims who do not fit in, mostly Chechens and Afghans, are relatively few in number.
  • Jihadi violence tends to be shoved under the rug and ignored.

Interestingly, while the I&I topic has barely surfaced in Austria, the issue of the FPÖ’s inclusion in the government has made waves.There are those who are not comfortable with the party’s guilt-by-association with National Socialism, criticizing its ‘politics of resentment’, or its anti-Western outlook. (The FPÖ opposes economic sanctions on Russia, signed a cooperative agreement with Putin’s party, and supported the Russian annexation of Crimea. It also supports the Serbian claim to Bosnia, the Republika Serbska.)  Those friendly to it point to its accurate civilizational critique, its positive evolution, and the dangers of Islamo-fascism.

Because the FPÖ shares much with its European counterparts in Germany, France, and Sweden, hostility to it in Austria has Europe-wide implications, foreshadowing future disputes over conservatives allying with populists. Pipes, though not exactly endorsing the FPÖ, advocates working with them for four reasons:

  • For example, the 89-year-old Jewish artist Arik Brauer (who personally witnessed the 1938 Anschluss) said he is less worried about the idiotic anti-Semitic songs sung by members of university fraternities, which pose little threat to Jews, than by 250 million Arabs who want him ‘under the earth.’ He’s right.
  • Second, a political party can change and be what its members make of it. (Note how the U.S. Democratic Party changed on the race issue.)
  • Third, parties focused on the I&I crises are rising in popularity across Europe and represent an important and growing body of opinion, which cannot be waved away or ignored.
  • Fourth, the FPÖ and kindred parties have a vital role in bringing immigration and Islamization issues to the fore: without them, other parties basically ignore the issue and leftist parties remain not just in deep denial but often ally with Islamists.

The key point made by Pipes is that the issues of immigration and Islamization are far more urgent than the relatively minor threat of neo-fascism and that parties focused on the I&I issue are key to preserving our civilization. Ignoring this issue will lead to immense, irreversible changes from which there may be no turning back.

8 thoughts on “If you have Muslims inside the gates, or on your borders, then you have Jihad”

  1. CM tells it as it is without relating the turds to the orifices through which they passed,
    Run this through Google: Islam Exposed Muqaddimah pg. 303
    You will find: “Bigotry and Intolerance Exemplified: ABC News”.
    Scroll to the end of the post and you will find a bullet list of direct links to texts. Read’em & weep!

    Ignore Muqaddimah 125 & 197, read 199 & 303. Read Jihad In Islam page 10 immediately afterward. They set forth the requirement of global conquest.

    racism: pages 125 & 197
    obligation to conquer the world: page 303
    Maududi’s “Jihad In Islam”, page 10
    8:39 war on pagans
    8:67 genocide & mercenary motivation
    47:4 genocide
    9:29 war on Jews, Christians & Zoroastrians
    9:120 Brownie Points for Terrorists! Refer to Tafsir Ibn kathir: “Rewards Of Jihad” for real clarity!!!!!
    9:123 War on nearest disbelievers first
    33:21 Emulation of Moe who did Jihad!
    The Life Of Muhammad
    page 651 of the text, 350 of the pdf.
    651 is the status of women in Isdamn, irrelevant. Turn instead to 326 & 510.
    Khalid sheikh Mohammad : Confessed to 911 as a “great duty” in Isdamn, page 2. Read it and curse Islam!!!
    First Barbary War Tripoli’s Ambassador told Jefferson why they attacked us.
    Bukhari 4.53.386
    vol. 4 page 108 see also 140 How Moe got his living, ref. Muqaddiman 199 War booty!!! 140: terrorism!!!
    Hedaya 2.139 permanent war. Pg. 141: Infidels may be attacked without provocation.
    Riyad us-Saliheen Jihad pg 271, the Jihad chapter with relevant ayat & ahadith in 16 pages.

    If you want more detail, including quotes from Islamic law run this search: Islam Exposed why “peace is impossible”
    Click on the series header, then, select Allah’s Imperatives: Jihad. With the exception of Reliance Of The Traveller, each quote is linked to source.

    Click the Terrorism link in the list of posts. Read the quotes from Tafsir ibn Kathir and The Life Of Moe! Read quotes from hedaya, another code of Isdamnic law!!!

  2. Now I’m gonna invoke the word CM ignored: SUPREMACISM Isdamn is supremacist and I have proof!
    9:33. It is He Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad ) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islâm), to make it superior over all religions even though the Mushrikûn (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allâh) hate (it).

    Re-read the clause I made bold face until it sinks in.

    sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 65:

    Narrated Abu Musa:

    A man came to the Prophet and asked, “A man fights for war booty; another fights for fame and a third fights for showing off; which of them fights in Allah’s Cause?” The Prophet said, “He who fights that Allah’s Word (i.e. Islam) should be superior, fights in Allah’s Cause.

    Read and re-read the bold faced sentence until you have it memorized. To make it superior~should be superior: fighting fi sybil Allah!!!!

    But wait, there is more!!!! Bear in mind: Allah uses Jews as models, both positively and negatively and he has replaced them with Muslims. His promises to Moses apply to Moe.

    7:129. They said: “We (Children of Israel) had suffered troubles before you came to us, and since you have come to us.” He said: “It may be that your Lord will destroy your enemy and make you successors on the earth, so that He may see how you act?”

    13:41. See they not that We gradually reduce the land (of disbelievers, by giving it to the believers, in war victories) from its outlying borders. And Allâh judges, there is none to put back His Judgement and He is Swift at reckoning.

  3. I am rude, impolite; an equal opportunity offender. I tell it as it is. Islamism :: Political Islam: It’s ISLAM, Stupid!!!

    CM puts it nicely, I blurt it out. Morons & Deceivers make a distinction where there is no difference!

    Recall how Shrub thought he was “The Decider”. Allah thinks he is, in partnership with Moe, of cuss. And assigning partners to Allah is shirk: one of the worst of mortal sins.

    A search for “the decision” turned up ten instances in the Hilali/Khan translation.

    3:109. And to Allâh belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And all matters go back (for decision) to Allâh.

    3:128. Not for you (O Muhammad , but for Allâh) is the decision; whether He turns in mercy to (pardons) them or punishes them; verily, they are the Zâlimûn (polytheists, disobedients, and wrong-doers, etc.).

    33:36. It is not for a believer, man or woman, when Allâh and His Messenger have decreed a matter that they should have any option in their decision. And whoever disobeys Allâh and His Messenger, he has indeed strayed in a plain error.

    when Allah & Moe have decreed a matter!!!!!!!
    Moe makes the decisions and you can not question them. No appeal! Likewise his caliphs. There is no division between mosque and state; they are one!

    Allah makes the decision, Moe waits for it, then he reveals it as divine writ. Whether it is about the arcane details of salat, zakat, hajj, hudd & saum or Jihad: Moe or his caliph decides, attributes it to Allah and that’s that; the matter is settled whether it is religion or state. This is a clue for the few able to grasp a clue.

      1. Allah has a business partner with whom he divides the spoils: 8.41. !

        Allah has a governing partner with whom he shares decision making. 33.36. !

        Red Surah Al-An’am , concentrating on 6.136. Allah has no partners!!!

        Run this through Google and take the first video in the serps: “Christian Prince Allah prays”

        Allah prays to Moe!!!!!

        4:82. Do they not then consider the Qur’ân carefully? Had it been from other than Allâh, they would surely have found therein much contradictions.

        Koran is CS! Q.E.D. !!!!!

  4. Let me refine that last statement a bit:

    In islam, Allah has no partners.
    So Allah simply IS “the Devil!”

    And also “the Devil” isn’t Allah.
    There is no Devil – only Allah!


    Notice how Muhammad didn’t name his new religion “Allah,” or “Allahism,” or “The Truth About Allah,” because that would have been kind of honest; in stead, he called it “Submission” (to Might-Makes-Right) which kind of gives it all away!


    One would think that, being indivisible and all, everyone and every thing automatically Submits in toto to Allah, just by existing. All the other squirrely stuff is in the Qur’an is obviously only designed to confuse people to make them Submit more specifically to Moe himself.

  5. False theocracy! The allegation such theocracy is by the same divinity of the Bible is also false, vs both the New and “Old” Testament. Two key portions of the Scripture: Acts 17 and Jeremiah 31. In the first text we can see how God allows an age of Grace, by which mankind are kindly called to repentance and conversion via the Gospel; in the second text we can see how Israel is a nation for ever in the move between the Old and the New Covenant. Islam simply doesn’t submit to the true God it claims to be accountable. It also contradicted itself by initially acknowledging the “Book” and the “People of the Book” and then decide facto persecuting both. Based upon the principle of revision or improving the “revelation” Axxxh in fact proceed by deception and false flags in a warlike fashion. We are at war indeed and all attempts of peace based on the rule of reciprocity are in fact a unilateral adventure with a delusional impression of success only until the arrangement of the 1WW will not be completely dismantled by the new axis in progress between the U.S. and now also the E.U. against the Will of The People we can still related to the Western Civilisation and the true democratic constitutions. Such a paradigm shift could not be arranged without high treason and the conflict of interest of the Plutocratic elite plotting behind the scene to steal the national sovreignty of the People and destroy the Judeo-Christian heritage of the Western Civilisation.

Comments are closed.