Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Wed 11/22/2006 View Tue 11/21/2006 View Mon 11/20/2006 View Sun 11/19/2006 View Sat 11/18/2006 View Fri 11/17/2006 View Thu 11/16/2006
1
2006-11-22 Home Front: Culture Wars
Fjordman : Why the Future May Not Belong to Islam
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by anonymous5089 2006-11-22 11:50|| || Front Page|| [4 views since 2007-05-07]  Top

#1 Great post, thanks. The author has some viable ideas I like.
Posted by Broadhead6 2006-11-22 11:55||   2006-11-22 11:55|| Front Page Top

#2 Great post, thanks. The author has some viable ideas I like.

A complete library of this author (Fjordman)'s essays.
Posted by anonymous5089 2006-11-22 12:23||   2006-11-22 12:23|| Front Page Top

#3 Typically, the future belongs to those who want it more. Judging from the recent election, we obviously aren't very interested.
Posted by Flineck Chereth4831 2006-11-22 13:48||   2006-11-22 13:48|| Front Page Top

#4 We need to create an environment where the practice of Islam is made difficult. Muslim citizens should be forced to accept our secular ways or leave if they desire sharia. Much of this can be done in a non-discriminatory way, by simply refusing to allow special pleading to Muslims. Do not allow Islamic public calls to prayer as this is offensive to other faiths. Both boys and girls should take part in all sporting and social activities of the school and the community. The veil should be banned in public institutions, thus contributing to breaking the traditional subjugation of women. Companies and public buildings should not be forced to build prayer rooms for Muslims. Enact laws to eliminate the abuse of family reunification laws. Do not permit major investments by Muslims in Western media or universities.

That's it ! Fjordman for president.
Posted by wxjames 2006-11-22 15:36||   2006-11-22 15:36|| Front Page Top

#5 Thanks A5089. Right. Stop coddlings these f**kers. They comply with our societal norms or we kick their asses out. Now. That's why this US Airways hubbub is a really big deal. Glad all the columnists and radio shows have jumped in with both feet and come down squarely on the throats of these treacherous Muzzie bastards.
Posted by SpecOp35 2006-11-22 16:19||   2006-11-22 16:19|| Front Page Top

#6 Fjordman continues to post some of the most well thought out essays on dealing with the rise of Islam.

According to Srdja Trifkovic, the author of Defeating Jihad, “The tangible cost of the presence of a Muslim man, woman and child to the American taxpayer is at least $100,000 each year. The cost of the general unpleasantness associated with the terrorist threat and its impact on the quality of our lives is, of course, incalculable. There is a direct, empirically verifiable correlation between the percentage of Muslims in a country and the increase of terrorist violence in that country (not to mention the general decline in the quality of life and civilized discourse)

Sooner or later, we have to deal with the implications of this fact. The best way to deal with the Islamic world is to have as little to do with it as possible. We should completely stop Muslim immigration. This could be done in indirect ways, such as banning immigration from nations known to be engaged in terrorism. All Muslim non-citizens in the West should be removed. We should also change our laws to ensure that Muslim citizens who advocate sharia, preach Jihad, the inequality of “infidels” etc should have their citizenship revoked and be deported back to their country of origin.

Regular contributor, A5089, recently posted a superb article by Amil Imani titled, “Democracy’s Problems with Islam”. It certainly merits reading for anyone who has not done so already. The writer casts Fjordman’s own concerns in a new light as he details many serious issues confronting the West as it attempts to assimilate a subculture that steadfastly refuses to integrate. Imani puts it rather plainly:

The large number of Muslims arrival of recent years is posing a serious problem to this nation of all nations. Bluntly speaking, no one can be a Muslim and an American at the same time. Here are some of the reasons.

* A Muslim is, first and foremost, an Ummehist—a citizen of international Islam. So, when a Muslim takes the Pledge of Allegiance, he is either ignorant of the implication of his pledge or is lying willfully. Ignorance is never a valid reason in the court of law, and lying in the process of becoming citizen is a ground for denying the application and even deporting the violator. Sadly enough, tagyyeh—lying, or dissimulation—is not only condoned, it is recommended to the Muslims in their scripture. Hence, a Muslim can and would lie without any compunctions, whenever it is expedient.

* Muslims, by belief and practice, are the most blatant violators of human rights. We hardly need to detail here Muslims’ systemic cruel treatment of the unbelievers, women of all persuasions, and any and all minorities across the board. To Muslims, human rights have a different meaning, and it protective provisions are reserved strictly for Muslims—primarily for Muslim men.

* Respect for the rule of law, as it is understood and practiced by civilized people, is an instrument of convenience to be used to advantage and to be violated when it is not, for the Muslim. A Muslim believes in a different law—the Shariah: a set of stone-age rules. Violation of the non-Muslim laws, therefore, is no violation at all to a Muslim.

As with Fjordman’s concerns “that Muslim citizens who advocate sharia, preach Jihad, the inequality of “infidels” etc should have their citizenship revoked and be deported back to their country of origin”, this needs to be extended to Muslims who are “Ummehists”. If a Muslim is just that first and foremost, before all allegiance to country of residence, then they must automatically be viewed as a threat. One might argue how many Christians may well feel that their religious orientation precedes all other commitments to their country. However, there is one crucial difference.

Islam is one of the only, if not the only, globally significant belief structure that both seeks universal domination and simultaneously grants free license (if not directly compelling its members) to lie, cheat, steal, kill or dissemble in whatever way that proves necessary to achieve its ends. Given that fact, it may soon become necessary to subject all American Muslims to biometric examination regarding their putative allegiance to America's constitutional rule and democratic ideals. Islam’s granting of taqqiya as halal (permitted by Islam), makes it into an almost unique threat and one that may require singular measures to counteract.

Science is rapidly perfecting fMRI (functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging), PET (Proton Emission Tomography) and other electro-neurochemical brain-mapping technologies that may well deliver reliable indications of whether particular neural networks essential for dissimulation and deception are engaged while responding to temporal interrogation or certain other cognitive stimuli.

Continued terrorist atrocities along with non-participation by moderate Muslims in an active and very-much-needed radical reformation of Islamic doctrine all point toward a probability of alloyed allegiance regarding the rule of man as opposed to theocratic lawgiving. This sordid track record forms a dangerous combination with Islam’s aforementioned dispensation for abject deceit. Such detrimental potential creates for itself an almost unique category of scrutiny and investigation. Do other groups qualify for such “preferential” treatment? Generally speaking, not nearly as much. Even the recent historical artifacts of Nazism and communism nowhere near approach the lethal perfidy that is Islam.

Is this a slippery slope? Hell yes. Are we on one already? You bet! Are we in grave danger of becoming our enemy? Not in any way worth fretting over. The public’s need for exhaustive and relatively conclusive indications regarding concrete individual allegiance or loyalty outweighs the privacy needs of those who preach or practice the very worst forms of deception.

Airport profiling is akin to biometric profiling like fingerprinting is to DNA analysis. There is little or no wiggle room in such advanced investigative methods. While such a genuine threat to secular Western progressive cultures exists in the form of Islam’s pursuit of global sharia law, it must be answered with all available tools. The West must deploy all non-lethal means solely for the sake of its own self-preservation.

Fjordman clearly understands how such vast numbers of Muslim immigrants pose a potential fifth column within a nation’s borders. The complete and total absence of any Islamic reformation makes good on that threat to the West. It may well prove that only those Muslims who can pass biometric confirmation of their support of America and for a reformed Islam should be allowed to remain in our country. In its current state, Islam bears many resemblances to a cult. American-born Muslim citizens who fail biometric assessment may need to be interred in deprogramming camps in order to defuse the possibility of espionage or domestic terrorism.

I fully comprehend the extraordinary measures being advocated here. I put them forth for examination and discussion. I make no claim of them being the only sure solution or even the most effective measures. My sole interest is in protecting America from the onslaught of Islam’s conscienceless assault upon the West.
Posted by Zenster">Zenster  2006-11-22 16:30||   2006-11-22 16:30|| Front Page Top

#7 Left out of Fjordman's commendable essay is the fact that Islamic fascism is being financed by its target, the rest of the world, through massive purchases of oil, mostly controlled by Islamic dictatorships of one kind or another. When oil output from Islamic sources really starts to fall (and I believe it will, sometime in the next 50 years) the dar-al-Islam will be a lot poorer, and its overgrown population base will have trouble just feeding itself. The rest of the world will also have economic difficulties stemming from this, but non-Muslim technical and social advantages will work greatly in their favor. The only way Islam will survive this crisis is to subjugate a good portion of the current dar-al-Harb or somehow force tribute payments.
Even if severely restricting social interactions with the Islamic world does come to pass, their domination of the world oil supply will still be a problem, although a temporary one. Whether the world can get through this crisis (and it is not just the jihad) is another question.
Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2006-11-22 19:24||   2006-11-22 19:24|| Front Page Top

#8 Fjorman advanced a valuable new term "Sarumans"
Let me continue in the same spirit. In order to survive, we must all become "Slobodans".
Posted by gromgoru 2006-11-22 22:06||   2006-11-22 22:06|| Front Page Top

23:49 Besoeker
23:37 Frank G
23:36 Frank G
23:25 Frank G
23:20 JAB
23:18 madtom
23:12 Frank G
22:57 Frank G
22:33 gromgoru
22:30 Frank G
22:26 gromgoru
22:26 Frank G
22:25 gromgoru
22:23 gromgoru
22:22 Comrade Steel
22:21 gromgoru
22:20 gromgoru
22:17 gromgoru
22:06 gromgoru
22:06 Thinemp Whimble2412
22:03 CrazyFool
22:00 Frank G
22:00 CrazyFool
21:59 Frank G









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com