Vienna, May 10, 2008 with thanx to the Gates of Vienna
* Sheik yer’mami sez:
Serge Trifcovic spills the beans. Serge doesn’t beat around the bush and makes it clear that our liberal, democratic society has no tomorrow if islam prevails. PC-multiculti-diversity and the leftie loons who buy into it will destroy us:
“Europe today is a powder keg,” Otto von Bismarck remarked , “and the leaders are like men smoking in an arsenal.”
I am not going to waste your time tonight with yet another treatise on why Islam is not the Religion of Peace, Tolerance, Compassion, etc, etc. We are beyond that. Had America agonized, in the aftermath of Pearl Harbor, whether Shinto was actually OK but only Bushido was bad, the Greater Asian Co-prosperity Sphere would be going strong to this day. Among reasonable people, unblinkered by the dicta of political correctitude, the real score on Muhammad and his followers is well known. It has been known for centuries. That score, however, no matter how calmly stated and comprehensively supported, invariably elicits the howls of “Islamophobia” from the neoliberal elite class.
AN EMINENTLY POSTMODERN LITTLE PHOBIA
In the way of an introduction, let us therefore look at the formal, legally tested definition of that word, the latest addition to the arsenal of postmodern “phobias.” It is provided by the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC) based here in Vienna. (“Orwellian” is a worn-out adjective, but it simply has to be used in connection with this particular institution.) The EUMC diligently tracks the instances of “Islamophobia” all over the Old Continent, which it defines by eight red flags:
1.       Islam is seen as a monolithic bloc, static and unresponsive to change.
2.       Islam is seen as separate and “Other.”
3.       Islam is seen as inferior to the West, barbaric, irrational, primitive and sexist.
4.       Islam is seen as violent, aggressive, linked to terrorism, engaged in a clash of civilizations.
5.       Islam is seen as a political ideology.
6.       Criticisms made of the West by Islam are rejected out of hand.
7.       Discriminatory practices and Muslims’ exclusion from mainstream society are advocated.
8.       Anti-Muslim hostility is seen as natural or normal.
This definition is obviously intended to preclude any possibility of meaningful discussion of Islam. As it happens,
1.       That Islam is static and unresponsive to change is evident from the absence of an internal, orthodox critique of jihad, sharia, jizya, etc. As Clement Huart pointed out back in 1907, “Until the newer conceptions, as to what the Koran teaches as to the duty of the believer towards non-believers, have spread further and have more generally leavened the mass of Moslem belief and opinion, it is the older and orthodox standpoint on this question which must be regarded by non-Moslems as representing Mohammedan teaching and as guiding Mohammedan action.” A century later his diagnosis still stands: it is not the jihadists who are “distorting” Islam; the would-be reformers are.
2.       That Islam is separate from our Western, Christian, European culture and civilization, and “other” than our culture and civilization, is a fact that will not change even if Europe eventually succumbs to the ongoing jihadist demographic onslaught.











