Monday, November 28, 2005

Stop the Islamization of Europe! Stop the Islamization of the West!

The West is being Islamized before our very eyes! It is happening in such subtle ways that it is sometimes imperceptible to those who are not looking out for it. But much of the time, what is happening is plain to see. Each and every concession we make to Muslims is a further nail in the coffin of liberal democracy. Each time we consider granting Muslims a public holiday, each time we consider curtailing our own freedom of speech to appease them, we are assisting Muslims to further Islamize our home countries. Be sure of that!

Western governments should not be powerless to deal with this, but evenso they seem to be: They lack the will and determination to stop the rot.

Political correctness, of course, has taken its toll on the West. So has the ridiculous concept of multiculturalism. Add to this a deep-seated guilt complex, a pervasive attitude of self-denigration, extreme tolerance, and an army of apologists for Islam, and we have a catastrophe in the making!

One of our greatest mistakes is to think of Islam as just another one of the world's great religions. We shouldn't. Islam is politics or it is nothing at all, but, of course, it is politics with a spiritual dimension, politics all wrapped up in a deity.

What is the nature of the politics of Islam? Well, that's an easy one to answer: It is little different from the politics of a totalitarian state, little different from the ideologies of Nazism or communism, different only in detail rather than style. Both Nazism and communism used the purge to try and 'cleanse' society of what it considered undesirable. Islam always does the same. Both of those tolerated only a single political party. Islam generally does the same, and certainly, where it doesn't, insists that all parties be Islamic ones. This, of course, gives the establishment the power to coerce the people. G. H. Sabine, in his book, A History of Political Theory, tells us this about Nazism and communism:
...the party was a self-constituted aristocracy which has [sic] the mission partly of leading, partly of instructing, and partly of coercing the bulk of mankind along the road that it must follow. Both were totalitarian in the sense that they obliterated the liberal distinction between areas of private judgment and of public control, and both turned the educational system into an agency of universal indoctrination. In their philosophy[,] both were utterly dogmatic, professing, the one in the name of the Aryan race and the other in the name of the proletariat, a higher insight capable of laying down rules for art, literature, science, and religion. Both induced a frame of mind akin to religious fanaticism. In strategy[,] both were reckless in their assertions, boundless in their claims, abusive toward their opponents, prone to regard any concession on their own part as a temporary expedient and on a rival's part as a sign of weakness. The social philosophies of both agreed in regarding society as in essence a system of forces, economic or racial, between which adjustment takes place by struggle and dominance rather than by mutual understanding and concession. Both therefore regarded politics as merely an expression of power.
So much in Islam resembles those two despicable ideologies. The ruling party in Islamic countries coerces the people along the road that it must follow. This is particularly easy to observe in Iran today. Islam, too, tries to obliterate the liberal distinction between areas of private judgment and of public control. We see this in all Islamic countries. Similar to Nazism and communism, Islam also turns the educational system into an apparatus of the state for the purpose of universal indoctrination. One would be justified in using the term 'brainwashing'.

In addition, Islam also lays down rules for art (no depiction of the human form is allowed, for example), for literature (all is censored), for science (nothing discovered may contradict the Qur'an or Ahadith, or the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad), and certainly for religion (no religion is accepted of man except Islam). Where Jews and Christians live in Islamic countries, they are given protection in return for a high tax known as the jiziyah, but are given dhimmi status, which means, in effect, that they are subdued and given second class status.

Islam also induces a frame of mind akin to fanaticism. That this is so is self-explanatory. Islam is also reckless in its assertions, and boundless in its claims. Example: All the world belongs to Allah; therefore it is the duty of all Muslims to Islamize it. In Islam, too, adjustment takes place by struggle and dominance. Note the Jihad.

A remarkable similarity is this: Islam is also inclined to be abusive to its opponents (they are infidels and unclean), and is prone to regard any concession on its own part as a temporary expedient and on a rival's part as a sign of weakness. And Islam, too, regards politics as an expression of power. Oh, and we shouldn't forget that Islam is profoundly anti-Semitic!

Aren't the similarities just remarkable?

What is troubling is this: Islam is closing in on us. We have so many unassimilated Muslims living in Europe, and an ever growing number living in the States, too. In fact, millions and millions of Muslims live in the West today. But the West has no strategy for dealing with the fall-out. We saw this recenty in France when their cities burnt night after night. The mayhem Muslim immigrants caused there was enough to make anyone's hair stand on end! But what has France done about it? It has unveiled a series of measures to appease the Muslim immigrants, and has ignored the fact that this was an uprising caused in no small part by the Islamic community flexing its ever strengthening muscles.

If we in the West wish to ensure the survival of our own civilization, wish to ensure that our children will be able to live as freely as we have been able to do, wish to ensure that people are free to choose their religion in the West, but just as free not to choose one, then we have a lot of thinking to do!

I would suggest that we start by asking one simple question: Should we regard Islam as a mere religion, or should we start to see it for what it truly is: A political ideology with megalomaniacal aspirations? A political ideology with a spiritual dimension which will stop at nothing until the West is no more, until the West has been brought into Dar ul Islam, or the 'House of Islam', until the West has been well and truly Islamized. To ignore this fact is tantamount to playing fast and loose with our children's future freedoms and security. In fact, it is negligent of their future well-being!

©Mark Alexander

All rights reserved

28 comments:

Mussolini said...

Mark:

Your consistent portrayal of Islam as a political ideology has not always sat well with me. However, the more time that passes, I begin to see that portrayal as perhaps the only way a secular government can approach the issue.

Not only is it plausible, but realistic - especially couched in terms of religion-for-political-domination.

Still a tough fight, though, since the West has now embraced communism as chic (Che and Castro). If we're willing to idolize communist murderers, how far behind are the muslims?

Mark said...

Your consistent portrayal of Islam as a political ideology has not always sat well with me.

You surprise me, Bill! I never thought I would read these words coming from you. Why? I don't know. I guess from the tenor of your past posts.

Bill, not only do I think it might be the only way that a secular government can approach the issue, I think it's the only realistic way to approach it. Even the Ayatollah Khomeini spoke of the political nature of Islam. Who am I to contradict his assessment of his own faith?

There is no separation of politics and religion in Islam, and there is no separation to be, either. Therefore, it has to be approached as a political ideology competing in every respect with liberal democracy.

Mussolini said...

Perhaps I'm too black-and-white in this issue.

Islam recognizes a creator-deity. Contrast with communism and naziism which do not. Contrast with secularism which does not.

To me, the fact that Islam recognizes a god places them solely into the religious category, whether or not devotion to religious precepts lead to political results.

You and I both know that the foundation of Islam is fuel for Muhammed's murderous political ambitions, but none can deny the religious faith that muslims hold. Whether or not Muhammed was a snake-oil shyster justifying with a phoney religion his bloody ambitions, over a billion muslims today believe in their hearts that god is behind their movement.

One can change politics with the passage of time. Islam has stood behind its idea of god for the last several centuries.

... however.

As I said, though, I am beginning to believe your portrayal of Islam as a political movement is not only realistic, but the only way secularism might see through the sham Islam is to have the will to fight it.

I hope that you are pleased rather than insulted that I make the post I did - that I have been persuaded by your reasoning. I make no apologies for how or what I think; it is who I am.

Jumping ahead a bit, I think that unless we can bring the media to our side, we still won't win this fight. The media is too wrapped up in its traditional anti-Christian ideology, and Islam being Christianity's natural enemy make a perfect "enemy of my enemy" situation.

Is there a media solution?

Mark said...

I hope that you are pleased rather than insulted that I make the post I did - that I have been persuaded by your reasoning.

Bill, I am pleased by your post. I am in no way insulted by it. I find the interaction stimulating in the extreme.

Islam recognizes a creator-deity. Contrast with communism and naziism which do not. Contrast with secularism which does not.
To me, the fact that Islam recognizes a god places them solely into the religious category, whether or not devotion to religious precepts lead to political results.
You and I both know that the foundation of Islam is fuel for Muhammed's murderous political ambitions, but none can deny the religious faith that muslims hold. Whether or not Muhammed was a snake-oil shyster justifying with a phoney religion his bloody ambitions, over a billion muslims today believe in their hearts that god is behind their movement.


Yes, Islam does indeed recognize a 'creator-deity'; but should that make the Islamic movement any less of a political ideology?

How clever Muhammad was to insist that there be no separation of the political from the spiritual! How clever he was to retire to a cave to receive Allah's 'revelations' from the Archangel Gabriel! Who was there to witness it? We have only Muhammad's word that this actually happened!

Doesn't it beggar belief that there are so many people willing to buy into this in the twenty-first century? It just goes to show how simple the mind of man really and truly is. They're always ready to listen to, and believe in, a good fable!

Islam cannot be thought of as a religion, pure and simple, for the very fact that it recognizes no separation of politics and religion. Christianity, by contrast does, so it truly is a spiritual movement, first and foremost. This, of course, makes Christianity weak by comparison with Islam in the modern world. It wasn't ever thus. There was a time when Christianity could barely be separated from the state.

It must be remembered, too, that Muhammad was a warrior, statesman and 'prophet;, and much else besides. His whole message is quite impossble to unravel in terms of politics and religion. Indeed, the political is a religion itself. Notice how political the leaders in the Islamic world are. Notice, too, the politics spouted forth in the preachings of imams in the mosques around the world.

I don't deny the religious faith of devout Muslims around the world. They've all bought into this stuff. Hey, I nearly did myself once! It took me years to get this stuff out of my hair upon my return from the Middle East. I, too, was nearly brainwashed by the whole thing. But I had a lucky escape: I escaped with my brain in tact, or so I'd like to believe.

You see, Bill, Muslims are very convincing when it comes to their religion. It's all portrayed very subtly and underminingly.

Mark said...

Jumping ahead a bit, I think that unless we can bring the media to our side, we still won't win this fight. The media is too wrapped up in its traditional anti-Christian ideology, and Islam being Christianity's natural enemy make a perfect "enemy of my enemy" situation.
Is there a media solution?


I'm sorry, Bill, but I omitted to refer to this part of your question. Let me try now.

The media is indeed too wrapped-ip in its anti-Christian ideology, and this will have to change if we are to win this struggle.

The problem, as I see it, stems directly from President Bush's refusal to state clearly that Islam was at war with America after 9/11. He should have done this. He needn't have said that America was at war with Islam, for clearly it wasn't. But it was so obvious that Islam was at war with America.

If he had done this, I believe there would have been a far greater chance for him to have dragged the media along with him, since 9/11 convulsed your nation. But instead of that, he started playing this game of apologetics, insisting all the while that Al-Qaeda had bastardized the true, peaceful nature of Islam, whereas, in actual fact, they were preaching the 'real' Islam, pure and simple - unadulterated, unvarnished Islam.

It's going to take a lot now to change the perceptions of the media, both sides of the Atlantic. The media tends to be peopled anyway with screaming liberals.

Unfortunately, it's going to take another catastrophe of 9/11 proportions, or even worse, I think, before politicians will start changing their rhetoric profoundly. But after the next catastrophe, that is exactly what our leaders should start doing. That way, the media would have to follow suit, and start seeing Islam for what it really is.

John Sobieski said...

Muslims have infiltrated all the institutions, our universities, our public school system, even prestigous 'think tanks' that our leaders rely upon for guidance and 'expert advice.'

Is it possible for a group of these 'experts' to sit around the table and discuss the true nature of Islam with a Muslim participating? Nope. In fact, it just leads to wishy washy statements hedged in political correctness.

Let me give you an example. Frank Gaffney, who has been a strong critic of Islam, has been on 2 to 3 minutes 'opinion checks' on CNN or FOX. He simply cannot say "Islam is the problem", instead he say's 'we can call them islamofascists'. It's the same old thing. It is not Islam, it is a deviant group within Islam called 'islamofascists.'

This thesis, a deviant group within Islam, has been sold over and over again. Even the politicians believe it.

Politicians do not want to believe that Islam itself is the problem. If they did, they would stop Muslim immigration immediately.

The first step is to stop Muslim immigration to the West.

Mark said...

Axis of Islam:

I agree with you wholeheartedly! What you say about Frank Gaffney sursprises me, since each and every time I have heard him speak of the problem - the last time was a year or so ago - I thought he was on top of the situation. I thought he was well-informed. How disappointing it is to read what you say!

Mussolini said...

Unfortunately, it's going to take another catastrophe of 9/11 proportions, or even worse, I think, before politicians will start changing their rhetoric profoundly.

Yes, I think so too. It will take another catastrophe, maybe even more than one.

The West has always been slow to respond - consider the Crusades. But when we do respond, it will be with ferocity.

The West has always responded thus. We allow a situation to develop, welcome the disease, coddle the adherents, and remain quiescent until the straw lands on the camel's back that breaks it. Then suddenly we're wiping out nations, firebombing 100s of 1000s of women and children and dropping nukes to make nice little seas of glass.

The West has never taken a common sense, measured approach to a civilization-threatening crisis.

For that, if this is not a lead-up to the end but a "birth-pang" portent, then I can see a silver lining to the current Islamic problem, tinted with much blood.

This thesis, a deviant group within Islam, has been sold over and over again. Even the politicians believe it.

And such is the enemy's ally until we stop fooling ourselves.

When and where will the courage come from to "risk" the media's scorn to name the deadly threat? Why does this courage require more 9/11s?

What happened to the truth?

Mark said...

Bill:

People never like hearing the truth, because the truth always hurts. Ouch!

Always On Watch said...

Mark,
What an outstanding analysis you have here! I've already sent many the link to this particular article.

Always On Watch said...

Bill,
I'm glad to see that you are realizing that Islam is more a geopolitical ideology than a religion. You see, religion is personal faith, but Islam is not a personal faith in the sense we understand the term. And when religion begins to serve the purpose of political domination, it's not really a personal faith any longer.

As a Christian, I struggled with the very concept of "disallowing" Islam because I firmly believe in freedom of religion. And you are right: begin to see that portrayal as perhaps the only way a secular government can approach the issue.
Not only is it plausible, but realistic - especially couched in terms of religion-for-political-domination.


Have you ever read that Islam is the only "religion" not to include the concept of the Golden Rule? If true--and Ali Sina asserts so--the lack of that concept goes a long way to explain the problem we face with Islam as a "religion."

Proclaim the truth because the truth is freedom!

PS: Excellent blog article and excellent comments too.

Mark said...

AlwaysOnWatch:

Thank you kindly for your compliment. Thank you also for sending out the link to your friends. I appreciate both.

Islam does not follow the golden rule at all. That is plain to see. They do not treat others as they would have others treat them; rather, they treat others in such a way that they make it imperative that the others 'revert' to Islam!

The West beware!

The Truth Teller said...

Mark,
Superior work here! I've posted a link to this particular article seven items down on the right sidebar of Truth as "Is Islam Merely Another Religion?" Sometimes it takes a while for the links to appear on the blog page, but it IS there.

I wish that this article you've written could be distributed far and wide.

Mark said...

Truth Teller:

Thank you so much for your compliment. I'm sure you realize how much I appreciate your kind words.

Thank you, too, for the link. I'll go and take a look right now.

usiconoclasticpatriot said...

Mark, This is the most penetrating, insightful and truthful analysis of the threat that faces the free world that I have seen. No one would ever accuse you of "pc spinning" the hard truths!!! Clearly, you have received appropriate compliments for your analysis from readers. Let me add my own words of appreciation to those of others. Please keep up the good work of defending freedom against those who would destroy it in the name of a "religion."

Franze said...

Mark, I have found thanks to a friend Blueslord, this blog, and I am very interested, I am an spanish catholic and I am worried about relativism who has weakened the west against islam.
Islam, is in my opinion, a religion more than politics, but like all you know religion and politics are united.
Like a western european I am worried about you have said, but it´s necessary more changes to revert the situation, more non-muslim birth rate, more critics to islam in mass media, not only politically but religiously, namely, using the freedom and the hope in a christian Europe.
Greetings and I will link you, my blog is http://nubaisla.blogspot.com

Mark said...

Franze:

Thanks for linking to my weblog. Naturally, in return, I shall place a reciprocal link to your blogspot on mine.

I'm so glad you like A New Dark Age Is Dawning. I shall look forward to reading your comments.

As you rightly say: Relativism is weakening the West greatly. We need to re-affirm our Judeo-Christian heritage.

Ouzian said...

now how about an opinion from someone who grew up as a muslim at the expense of her childhood, life, and peace of mind??

I can really confess that islam is not a religion of peace.....

for not accepting me the way I was and now directing it at the west.

Mark said...

Ouzian:

Thank you for being so honest. I'm sure I can speak for all my visitors when I express that thanks.

Welcome to this weblog, by the way. It will be good to read your opinions.

ceci5511 said...

I have read your article carefully and although I agree with you that Islam is a religion conceived in violence that does not mean the people who follow it are consumed with this hatred towards the west. I think extremists are the ones that give this religion a bad name, the Islamic religion speaks of love and tolerance, yet as human beings we are flawed and take from the religion what we want, interpret it how we want.
However, I cannot defend the acts of violence many followers of Islam have shown towards the West, its value and traditions. I would like ask those extremists...if you loathe the West and what it represents so much then why move here and benefit from what it has to offer, like freedom, individuality, etc...
Yet again, when I write this don’t I become the extremists who without knowing all the Islam followers in the world has already judged them?

Mark said...

Ceci5511;

I have read your article carefully and although I agree with you that Islam is a religion conceived in violence that does not mean the people who follow it are consumed with this hatred towards the west.

Welcome to my blog, Ceci!

Please do not think that I believe that all Muslims are consumed with hatred towards the West. I do not.

But Islam is not a religion of love. I disagree with you on this point. If there is love in the religion – and it is difficult to find – then it is love for the fellow believers. There is certainly no love for the infidels.

I think extremists are the ones that give this religion a bad name,

Without a doubt, it is the extremists who give the religion a very bad name. But the so-called moderates do nothing to rein them in.

the Islamic religion speaks of love and tolerance, yet as human beings we are flawed and take from the religion what we want, interpret it how we want.

Please see my comment above.

However, I cannot defend the acts of violence many followers of Islam have shown towards the West, its value and traditions. I would like ask those extremists...if you loathe the West and what it represents so much then why move here and benefit from what it has to offer, like freedom, individuality, etc...

I agree with you wholeheartedly.

Yet again, when I write this don’t I become the extremists who without knowing all the Islam followers in the world has already judged them

Please explain this sentence. I do not quite understand what you are trying to say.

ceci5511 said...

Kind of ambiguous I know-it was late at night. But what I mean is that there is always a different side to every argument. For example, I can say that it is not Islamic religion that fuels the hate some Muslim people have towards the West but the West itself. By this I am referring to the West´s occupation of many Arab countries in the late 1800 and early 1900, they all regained their sovereignty yet the abuse and oppression is still latent. And how about the case of Palestine which became part of the British mandate in 1920, the mandate stipulated the British could rule indirectly as was the case with mandate governments in most Arab states. But in Palestine this statue was violated, there Great Britain ruled directly and the mandate government had full legislative, administrative and judicial competence. This was an obvious abuse of power yet the British went even further and included the Balfour Declaration in the mandate document, therefore committing themselves to the founding of a ´Jewish national home’ in Palestinian territory. Furthermore, on May 1, 1947 the United Nations set up a UN Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP) to resolve the conflict which the British had caused. They met to review the partition of Palestine, which the Palestinians did not condone. Because of the fact the Palestinians did not want to divide Palestine the United Nations was to make the final decision. Finally, a majority in the General Assembly voted in favour of the partition plan. The Arab states, the Arab League and the Arab Higher Committee rejected the decision to partition Palestine. They argued, rightly, that the UN could only make recommendations and could not pass binding resolutions. In particular, the United Nations did not and does not have the right to determine a country´s fate without consulting the people of that country. So really...even if the Islamic religion where the most loving and tolerant religion on earth I think we will still be seeing riots and violent acts against the West. The West, wether we want to accept it or not has abused its power, It is no wonder they hate us.
And this hate that the Islamic people have is only now being addressed because we have no other choice, it’s happening in our streets. But we have to recognize that for hundreds of years the West has oppressed and dictated what many Arab countries of different ideologies and beliefs should do; minimising their culture and imposing theirs. This has justly created a time bomb which is now exploding, like the acts of bombing of Western embassies in Arab countries, 9/11, etc. I don’t see it stopping any time soon, and why should it really; the West didn’t stop when it was furthering its interests in Arab soil. I am not a supporter of violence yet I am a supporter of viewing both sides of the conflict. One cannot judge a culture/religion and not recognize the flaws of its own.
Just to clarify I am not a Muslim nor am I an Arab. I am Peruvian and living in Australia, so I couldn’t be more impartial. Yet I don’t believe it’s fair to criticize the ‘others’ without recognising the West faults, which for many years has been creating this fragmentation. What goes around comes around.

Always On Watch said...

Ceci 5511,
Yet I don’t believe it’s fair to criticize the ‘others’ without recognising the West faults, which for many years has been creating this fragmentation. What goes around comes around.

Of course, the same kind of fragmentation and division could be said of many nations -- past and present.

It's good to look at both sides of an issue. Important, really.

However, in the case of Pseudostine, the only acceptable solution for many Pseudostinians is the annihilation of Israel. For example, see The Charter of Hamas. The principles state as follows:

"Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it." (The Martyr, Imam Hassan al-Banna, of blessed memory).

"The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Muslim generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up. "

"There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors."


Now, the modern nation of Israel has been in existence some 40 years. Does not it behoove all sane people to recognize Israel as a nation? After all, I think that the world recognizes younger nations as valid and having a right to exist.

As I see it, Israel has compromised much, the Pseudostinians, little.

The problem with recognising the West faults is that the West is then expected to atone for those faults. If there is to be any peace in the Middle East, recriminations about the past should have no part, in my opinion. Otherwise, the region will be caught up in a never-ending feud such as this one between the Hatfields and the McCoys.

Mark said...

Ceci5511:

Always On Watch has done a marvelous job in answering your points. What more can I add?

I would like to say the following, however:

I agree with you that there is always a different side of the story.

The problem as I see it with the Palestinian problem is this: The Palestinians and other Arabs and Muslims will never be satisfied until the state of Israel exists no longer. This is, after all, their stated aim. AlwaysOnWatch has said all that needs to be said. Were it just to be a question of a two-state solution in which both sides recognize the right of the other to exist, then I would have no problem with it. But this is NOT the case.

Check this out, written by Melanie Phillips. It is an excellent commentary on the problem; and an excellent commentary on Obama's speech in Cairo to boot.

The fact of the matter is that there is nothing but hatred of Jews in the world of Islam. Until this hatred can be overcome – if it ever will be, if it ever can be – then I see no long, lasting solution to the problem.

Mark said...

Always, thank you for this excellent comment. Your points were stated so eloquently, as I would expect, of course.

ceci5511 said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1F1-J7jaug

a friend sent me this video. i just wanted to put it out there because it is the west´s biggest fear, and it should be. the europe we know will not be the europe our children will live in...

Mark said...

Ceci5511:

Thanks for this video. I have placed this up twice, but in English, not Spanish.

I am very grateful for the link in Spanish.

Again, thank you.

I agree with you wholeheartedly: The Europe our children will inherit will be a very different Europe from the one we have known, and loved.

Anonymous said...

This should be more obvious now than when this was written. We have to look at Christianities past to see the answer. It is much the same, despotic monarchs were "chosen by God" to lead and had total control. It has since reformed because of men like Martin Luther. Islam needs their own Martin Luther. The question is can Islam separate it's politics from its religion? I want to say yes, good people can, but I also feel that they are so tightly tied together that good people may never get the chance.