We are at war

We must not be punished for criticizing Islam

Islamic terrorists have declared war on Europe and the result has been a series of deadly attacks – at airports, subways, cafés, concert halls, and, most recently, Christmas markets. All this mayhem is the indirect result of ignorance about Islam – an ignorance that, in turn, is the result of an almost complete blackout of news unfavorable to Islam.

Anyone with a thorough understanding of Islamic culture and religion could have predicted that, even without the 2015-16 flood of Muslim migrants, the steady flow of Muslim immigrants over the years would create a combustible situation. The amazing thing is that the consequences of this massive migration were never discussed – except in glowing terms. Just about the only thing allowed to be said about the migrants was that they would solve labor shortages, refill welfare coffers, and bring cultural enrichment to Europe.

That was the official line. Anyone who deviated from it could expect censure, possible job loss, or even a criminal trial. Say something negative about Muslim immigration on your Facebook page and you would be visited by police. Say it in public and you would receive a court summons. It didn’t matter if you were a famous writer (Oriana Fallaci), the President of the Danish Free Press Society (Lars Hedegaard), or a popular member of the Dutch Parliament (Geert Wilders). If you couldn’t say something nice about Islam, then you shouldn’t say anything at all.

Related news:

Dutch anti-Islam MP plans on launching Prophet Mohamad cartoon contest

 Wilders claimed that he would host the contest with “world famous cartoonist and ex-Muslim Bosch Fawstin” and that there would be €5,000 in prize money up for grabs. …

Geert Wilders

The far-right politician also announced that a racist clip titled “Islam is Deadly” would be broadcasted on Dutch national television.

Wilders lodged a similar plan to hold an anti-Islam exhibition three years ago which was rejected by parliament.

In the European case, the idea that criticizing Islam will create an army of radicals doesn’t hold up. Criticism of Islam is essentially a crime in many parts of Europe and has been for a long time. In Europe, few dared criticize Islam, but the radicals came anyway. More than anything else, it was silence that allowed Islamization and radicalization to spread through France, Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Sweden.

Practically no one spoke up about no-go-zones, sharia courts, polygamy, and forced marriages, refusal to integrate, crime waves, and the rape epidemic. Now that many are finally beginning to speak out, it may be too late to avoid capitulation (Sweden’s likely fate) or bloody conflict (more likely in France).

The very argument that criticism of Islam will drive moderates into the radical camp suggests that criticism is needed. If Islam is such a hair-trigger religion that the slightest offense might radicalize adherents, there is something radically wrong with the religion itself. We don’t worry that criticizing Catholicism is going to produce angry Catholic mobs rampaging through the streets. We don’t fear that one wrong word is going to cause a young Southern Baptist to strap on a suicide belt.

Islam invites criticism. Given its bloody past and present, it would be highly irresponsible not to subject it to a searching analysis and critique. Such a critique would not aim at alienating Muslims (although some will inevitably be alienated), but at alerting likely victims of jihad.

One of the basics that non-Muslims need to know is that Islam divides the world in two – the House of Islam, and the House of War (all non-Islamic societies). And every Muslim is expected to do his part to make the House of War submit to the House of Islam. Europeans are now experiencing a “don’t-know-what-hit-me” sense of bewilderment because they never learned this basic fact about Islam.

One reason for our reluctance to analyze and criticize Islam (an idea) is that such criticism seems tantamount to criticizing Muslims (a people). Unfortunately, even if that is not the intention, it is often the result. A person can’t separate himself entirely from his beliefs, and, consequently, we take criticism of our religion personally. That’s a good reason for presenting the critique as tactfully as possible. But it’s not a good reason for offering no critique at all.

If you can’t criticize a belief system because it would hurt the feelings of people who subscribe to that system, then we were wrong to criticize Nazism, Communism, and Japanese imperialism. Ordinarily, we refrain from criticizing other religions. Such a live-and-let-live approach is generally sensible, but when the other religion takes the attitude that you must either convert, submit, or die, then live-and-let-live is no longer an option. That is the position that we are in with regard to Islam. And it is suicidal to pretend that things are otherwise.

5 thoughts on “We are at war”

  1. Excellent. Good on him.

    I hope that artists such as Kurt Westergaard and Lars Vilks step up to the plate.

    And maybe there will be other brave apostates besides Mr Fawstin who will do their thing.

  2. It is becoming obvious that the European voter is finally waking up to the sabotage of European peoples and all that they hold dear. Their enemies actually use their rights and freedoms to conquer and suppress the native populations, but recent election results suggest that Europeans are saying Basta! to diversity, multiculturalism and cultural Marxism. We need specific proposals to be implemented, and there has to be enough free speech to discuss and debate these proposals. Here are some ideas.
    1. Migrants, whether you call them refugees, invaders or economic migrants, must be helped in their home countries. The billions spent by the EU on welfare costs would have solved all the migrants’ problems if that money had been invested into their societies.
    2. Europeans, in Europe and the USA, must disengage largely from involvement in foreign wars. If Asians or Africans want to kill each other, whether by gassing or shooting each other, that is their business. If you get involved you will be held responsible for any and all outcomes. Bleeding- heart left wingers who want to get involved must do so through personal commitments, not through government channels.
    3. European governments are carrying an enormous foreign aid bill for third world countries. Britain currently gives away £14 billion per year, and very little of it actually reaches the poor or hungry in those countries. Stop that nonsense. Britain needs massive investment in housing and the health sectors, so do the right thing.
    4. Progressives and other self-loathing liberals will point out that withdrawal of foreign aid, which includes medical supplies and food, will unduly hurt the third world populations. My dear, naïve readers, the third world populations that receive your money, medicines and food supplies, already hate you and blame all their problems on you. Furthermore, if your assistance allows them to double or triple their populations that will simply become grounds for more massive migration waves towards Europe and America. Let other people manage their own countries – as long as they are not threatening you, let them be.
    5. Most Europeans have denounced their Christian faith, so on what grounds do they now think they are obliged to interfere in foreign countries just because their leaders are cruel, incompetent or corrupt? The Palestinians have suffered terribly, mostly because of their political leadership, which, with the possible exceptions of Maduro and Trudeau, have been the worst in the world. As with Venezuela and Canada, let the Palestinians wake up to their own mistakes and stop pouring money into their politicians’ Swiss or Dubai bank accounts.
    6. The migrants that have moved to Europe in the last thirty years have had sufficient time, money and opportunity to assimilate. Those that have not bothered to learn the local language, or cannot answer a simple test concerning the history or traditions of their adopted country, must remigrate. Migrants who have been involved in any violent crime, for whatever reason, must remigrate. Welfare benefits should run for six months, not forever. Six months benefits, another six months to start working, failing which it is time to head on home.
    7. Migrants only entitled to further welfare benefits once they have been paying taxes and contributing to unemployment or provident funds for a minimum of 5 years.
    8. In some countries, particularly Muslim countries, criminals are punished in line with the crimes they have committed. For example, thieves have their hands cut off. In Europe the punishment for rape must be, aside from any incarceration, either castration or chemical emasculation. No ifs, no buts – judges only decide on length of imprisonment.
    9. You can have four wives or twenty four, your business. But you can only claim benefits for one of them, and up to a maximum of four children. If you exceed that you are guilty of theft and you and your immediate dependents should be shipped back home.
    10. Anybody, including government officials, who label other people racists, Nazis or extremists, simply because they hold a different opinion, should be liable to arrest and imprisonment. If somebody is a Nazi sympathizer or threatens other race groups, that allegation must be proven in a Race Tribunal composed of a balanced panel of political viewpoints. Dislike of other people is not a crime and does not have to be defended in a court of law.

    1. But oh boy, where do we start! I fear outright rebellion is inevitable since Europe has dilly dallied far too long. Mostly we need men and women with back bone and the clear understanding that there is an actual verifiable war going on! I think this current U.S government is the last best hope for civilization. Europe, and the U.K apparently are already too far down the slippery slope.
      There needs to be a war declared on Islam immediately.

  3. Rob, you are spot on, ‘where do we start’ – the critical difference between any prior resistance movement in history, and the push for European resistance now, relates to the ability of people to meet, talk and organize. The technology of the last three decades, or so, makes it impossible for anybody to organize without their government knowing about it. Every single phone call, text message and email can be flagged for content, which is the reason the only acts of violence that succeed are those of the ‘lone wolf’. European governments have been able to reduce the size of their security organizations simply because the surveillance technology has become so sophisticated. And it doesn’t end with communications; they use facial and voice recognition software, as well as psycho- and biometric programs, to create profiles and track people and groups. In other words, there can be no resistance in the traditional sense, unless people first understand the nature of the beast.
    That does not preclude some kind of resistance succeeding. The first and most benign resistance is of course at the ballot box – but that assumes that enough voters are aware of the danger they are in and understand the need to adopt harsh measures to defend themselves and their societies. While the examples of Hungary, Poland and now Italy give us all some hope, the continued policy of burying their heads in the sand, such as the French, German and Dutch do, is depressing. The UK could actually turn much quicker than you can imagine, only because all the major parties have forsaken the British working classes and a spark could trigger a violent reaction.
    So, what chance of a European uprising? There are millions of people ready to contribute, but the single most urgent need is a focal symbol of resistance. Symbols are important and act not only as a rallying cry to the angry and the desperate but also motivate the brave and the good.
    I am no soldier or strategist, merely of course theorizing on the possibilities, but let us imagine, say, that the European resistance adopted the HAWK (a proud and positive symbol) which was left as a signature card at every lone wolf attack.
    Before long every freedom fighter will be carrying the Hawk with them, on their chests and on their flags. Millions of people will realize suddenly that they have millions of friends and allies. Suddenly the HAWK will symbolize every Hunter And Warrior Kafir in Europe.
    In the meantime, who will do anything?

  4. The expression is ‘you cannot see the forest for the trees’. We do not need to carry out any military exercises or physically attack anybody or anything. We have the most powerful weapon in our hands – the Muslim immigrants. Offend them deeply enough and they will rage hysterically against everybody. A couple of trotters on the steps of the local mosque angers them more than killing a thousand of them, the right cartoons of you-know-who and they all go ballistic. So, use your strengths, and play to their weaknesses. If they can be offended seriously enough, we will not have to worry about waking up the Europeans, the Muslims will do it for us. Think about that.

Comments are closed.