Daniel Pipes On "Islamists"

Islamists, Get Out
By Daniel Pipes
FrontPageMagazine.com | August 30, 2005

As the full implications of the London’s terrorism by domestic jihadis sink in, Westerners speak out about the problem of radical Islam with new clarity and boldness.

The most profound development is the sudden need of the British and others to assert what it means to be British, Australian, or some other nationality. In the face of the Islamist challenge, historic identities taken for granted must now be explained and codified.

This can be seen on a diurnal level, where Islamist assertion has provoked a new European willingness in recent months to stand up for historic customs – as seen by the banning of burqas in Italy, requiring a German school boy to attend co-ed swimming classes, and making male applicants for Irish citizenship renounce polygamy. When a ranking Belgian politician cancelled lunch with an Iranian group after it demanded that alcohol not be present, his spokesman helpfully explained, “You can’t force the authorities of Belgium to drink water.”

As shown by two statements on the same day last week (Aug. 24), leading Western politicians are going beyond these minor specifics to address the civilizational heart of the matter.

David Cameron, the British shadow education secretary and one of the Conservative Party’s bright prospects, defined Britishness as “freedom under the rule of law,” adding that this expression “explains almost everything you need to know about our country, our institutions, our history, our culture - even our economy.” Peter Costello, the treasurer of Australia and regarded as heir apparent to Prime Minister John Howard, asserts, “Australia expects its citizens to abide by core beliefs: democracy, the rule of law, the independent judiciary, independent liberty.”

Cameron also spoke with a bluntness unique in four years of politicians’ discourse since 9/11: “The driving force behind today’s terrorist threat is Islamist fundamentalism. The struggle we are engaged in is, at root, ideological. During the last century a strain of Islamist thinking has developed which, like other totalitarianisms, such as Nazi-ism and Communism, offers its followers a form of redemption through violence.”

Most striking are the growing calls to extrude Islamists. Two politicians have advised foreign Islamists to stay away. Monique Gagnon-Tremblay, Quebec’s international relations minister, retracted the welcome mat from those “who want to come to Quebec and who do not respect women’s rights or who do not respect whatever rights may be in our Civil Code.” Bob Carr, premier of New South Wales, Australia (which includes Sydney), wants would-be immigrants to be denied visas if they refuse to integrate: “I don’t think they should be let in.”

Costello goes further, observing that Australia “is founded on a democracy. According to our Constitution, we have a secular state. Our laws are made by the Australian Parliament. If those are not your values, if you want a country which has Shari’a law or a theocratic state, then Australia is not for you.” Islamists with dual citizenship, he suggests, could be asked “to exercise that other citizenship,” i.e., leave Australia.

Likewise, Brendan Nelson, Australia’s education minister, also on Aug. 24 urged immigrants to “commit to the Australian constitution, Australian rule of law.” If not, “they can basically clear off.” Geert Wilders, head of his own small party in the Dutch parliament, similarly called for the expulsion of non-citizen immigrants who refuse to integrate.

But it was the British shadow defence minister, Gerald Howarth, who went the furthest, suggesting in early August that all British Islamists must go. “If they don’t like our way of life, there is a simple remedy: go to another country, get out.” He directed this principle even to Islamists born in Britain (such as three of the four London bombers): “If you don’t give allegiance to this country, then leave.”

These statements, all dating from the past half-year, prompt several observations. First, where are the Americans? No major U.S. politician has spoken of making American-based Islamists unwelcome. Who will be the first?

Second, note the consistent focus on the law and legal issues. This correctly picks up on the fact that ultimately, the Islamist project concerns the application of Islamic law, the Shari’a.

And finally, these comments are likely to be leading indicators of a broader campaign to restrict and remove Islamists – a move that comes none too soon.

Boy Scouts & Terrorists

The 29 August 2005 issue of Time magazine had two articles as to Muslims. The first concerned the increasing violence and increasingly inter-sect violence in Iraq where barbers and their family members are being murdered as the Koran forbids the cutting of beards. The second article was about Muslim Boy Scouts in a largely Christian organization.

I fear for the future of those fine young men now involved in the Scouting movement---If they go to the typical Muslim school where they are likely to be corrupted by Wahabi trained or orientated teachers who will instruct them to hate every thing and every body who does not join or surrender to Islam and, most specially, the Wahabi view of Islam and the World.

"Give unto Caesar ....."

In the world into which Jesus the Christ was born, lived, died and rose and the world his followers worked within, Rome was the “great power”. Roman citizenship has its rights and was limited to those born to it---And to who it was given as a special privilege. It appears that Saint Paul had that citizenship; But, none of “The Twelve”, nor Jesus Himself, had the rights and duties of Roman Citizenship.

The granting of such citizenship was from Caesar and the Roman Senate. It, like the coin of tribute, was “unto Caesar” and not what was God's.

In a republic like our own, citizenship is limited to those born to it (By being born in the USA per our Constitution) or to whom it is granted by compliance with our naturalization laws or by very special acts of the Congress. As you can see from the first, two, paragraphs above, citizenship is a civil and not a religious matter!

THEREFORE, I fail to understand the position taken by too many of the Bishops of my church (The Catholic Church), leaders of other religious groups and so many others of the fuzzy thinking sub-classes, that there is some moral or religious right to both entry into the USA, in violation of our democratically passed laws, and even US citizenship for such illegal immigrants and, because of the crimes of their parents, their children.

MY RECOMMENDATION, to clarify this matter and better protect the laws and essential nature of our nation, is to Amend our Constitution as follows:

“No person illegally in the United States of America shall have any

rights or protections, except against cruel and unusual punishments,

under this Constitution or its amendment. The discrete but effective

physical marking of such persons shall not be considered cruel and

unusual punishment. The children of such persons born, after the year

1990, to persons illegally in the United States of America shall not be

considered citizens of this nation.”

ONE FURTHER THOUGHT: As citizenship, and even residency, in the USA is to valuable that many will risk death on the open seas or on the burning desert to gain it, why not make citizenship in this land a reward for six or more years of fully honorable service in our armed forces for those who meet strict standards for physical-condition, mental ability, lack of criminal convictions (In the USA and other lands) and like standards? This cannot but give us the type of new citizens we most need and will further protect us from the many who wish to destroy us.

Inbreeding & "Islam"

Perhaps, I was (At least in part) wrong about “Islam” and the people who follow the teachings of that desert bandit Mohammed. I thought they followed “Islam” for a share of the power and wealth gained by Mohammed's example of the use of aggressive war, genocide, robbery, retail murder, rape and other sexual perversions. I have also wondered why there has been so little, if any, creativity in “Islamic” cultures as to art, science and music. I had thought it was Mohammed's (And following theologians') declarations against art, music and anything which contradicts the Koran.

Could it be that 1500-years of genetic inbreeding is, at least in part, responsible for the growing-over-time faults in “Islamic culture”? (Please see the article below.)

Quoted Article

Inbreeding and the Arab World's Pathologies
By P. David Hornik
FrontPageMagazine.com | August 25, 2005

The lead article in the August issue of the Israel Medical Association Journal reports success in lowering infant mortality rates among Arabs in the Western Galilee. These rates being generally twice as high among Israeli Arabs as among Israeli Jews, by 2002 an Israeli health program launched in the late 1980s had lowered the rate among Western Galilee Arabs to about 1.5 that of the Jews in the area.

The program found three main factors causing the high rates among the Arabs: infections, home births, and diseases resulting from inbreeding. About 40 percent of Muslim and Druze women and 70 percent of Bedouin women in the region were found to be married to first- or second-degree relatives.

Through an information campaign, the infant mortality from infections and home births has almost been eliminated in Western Galilee. The health program is now trying to tackle the inbreeding problem, using ultrasound screening for pregnant women in consanguineous marriages, articles in the media, and study days for health workers, schoolteachers, and religious and community leaders on the harmful effects of inbreeding. The program emphasizes the fact that consanguineous marriage is in no way mandated by Islam.

Rooted in ancient custom, consanguinity is nonetheless widespread in the Arab world; for example, a 1989 study in Iraq found 53 percent of the subjects to be consanguineously married. One result is the prevalence of extended clans that lead to nepotism and lower levels of identification with the state. The clan structure is a major factor in the Arab world’s endemic corruption and lack of civil society.

But if, as the Israeli study highlights, inbreeding is also a major cause of disease, another conclusion seems inescapable. Just as modern medicine recognizes genetic sources of many physical illnesses, modern psychology recognizes genetic components in many psychological problems including criminality. Presumably, a region where inbreeding is rife—and reinforced through successive generations—should also have a greater frequency of such mental ailments. Though, not surprisingly, there seem to have been no studies in that regard given the delicacy of the subject, the high levels of social pathology, violence, and terrorism in the Arab world suggest that inbreeding is one of the causes.

Such observations are not, of course, comfortable because they are likely to inspire absurd charges of racism. Racism, of course, is not the issue; inbreeding is equally bad for all kinds of people, but Arabs happen to practice it. Indeed, in today’s world it is found mainly in a salient extending from Morocco to Southern India.

Skeptics about attempts to reform or democratize the Arab world often point to Islam as a factor more fundamental than political practices such as elections. It seems they should also emphasize the separate problem of inbreeding. Although it would require great resources, it may be that programs like the Israeli one in Western Galilee could contribute more to helping the Arab world overcome its problems than strictly political reforms for which it may not be ready.

Additional Comments By James Pawlak

Of course, the Amish are very, very, inbred (To the point where their collective health and culture are in great danger) AND a more integrated, rational, Christian and peaceful culture is hard to find. Maybe I was right in the first place!

Another Excellent Book--US History

Woods, Thomas E. Jr., PhD.

The Politically Incorrect Guide To American History

Regnery Publishing, Inc.

Washington, DC; 2004

ISBN 0-89526-047-6

I find it difficult to find words strong enough to praise this work! However, I specially like it for:

1. Its clarity of language;
   

2. The many references given -Especially as to books “some people” do not want us to read; And,

3. That it exposes and destroys the myths, misconceptions and just damn lies that have crept into and taken over too many (Most) of our other American history books, teachers' lecture notes, other books and teachers' notes and newspapers' and magazines' presentations of our history, laws and form of government.
   
   

This clarifying book should (Must?) be:

1. Required reading in every one-year American History course as taught in grade schools, high schools and universities;

2. Referred to and made available to students taking other, more specialized American history, economics, world history (Since 1776), political science (Especially as to our Courts and the balance-of-powers in our government) and other selected courses;

3. Read by every US Senator before-voting on judicial nominations and granting

   “war powers” to the President without a formal “Declaration of War”;

4. Anyone (eg Newspaper editors) who comment on any of the above subjects;

   And,

5. Any citizen who wishes to really be informed about this nation's history.
   
   

I found of very special interest the presentation of a very, very, good argument that our Constitution's “First Amendment” prohibition against the national government's establishment of a religion (Like England's “Church of England) was to protect each State's (ex-colony's) rights to each maintain an approved religion, if they had one, and NOT to keep such actions out of the control of the “Several States”, each for for their own purposes! Therefore, such states as Alabama had and have a true and Constitutional Right to set Christianity as its official or primary religion!!!

I am fortunate that my library (The Milwaukee County System) has several copies of this book. If your library does not have it, insist (Demand?) that they get one or more copies.

The Emptiness Of Islam

Islam is the “religion” of a desert bandit named Mohammed. It creates nothing, but only steals and destroys. It has no music except some, mostly pre-Islamic, folk songs. It has no art except sterile geometric forms and an, admittedly, elegant script---Which dates to the era before Mohammed. Islam created no poetry and, in fact, destroyed a rich tradition of Arabic, pre-Islamic, literature. Such poetry as was developed in the lands ruled by Islam tends to be “heretical” and, in a large measure, is based on pre-Islamic Persian traditions. The so-called “Golden Age” of Islam was based on pre-Islamic Indian, Persian, Greek, Jewish and other sources. Even the so-called “Arabic numerals” and concept of “zero” are Indian in origin.

The claimed early and great universities of Islam are only theological schools which tend to suppress thought as much or more than create it. The other universities in lands considered Islamic (And, some of them are very good) are based on the traditions of European and New World schools. Where are the truly Islamic Nobel Prize winners? What great medical or scientific discoveries can be attributed to the true believers of Islam? What musical or artistic geniuses have come out of Islam?

As to destruction, that is a very old Muslim tradition. In the final destruction of the Library of Alexandria, the invading Muslim general was, to paraphrase, quoted as saying, “If the books (In that library) are not the Koran, there is no need to not burn them!”. Muslims took the “Land of milk and honey” and converted it into a desert---Which the People of Israel have, in the last 100-years, mightily worked to turn it back to what it was before Islam---and better.

The only thing that Islam has to offer the world is genocide, rape, robbery, destruction of property, retail murder, suppression of creativity, terrorism and hate for everything not like it.

A Better (Best?) Book On Islam

Spencer, Robert
The Politically Incorrect Guide To Islam (And The Crusades)
Regnery Publishing, Inc.; Washinton, D.C.
Copyright 2005; Library of Congress cateloging in process; No ISBN given.

I cannot praise this book enough for its: Research base of Muslim, Christian and other reliable sources; Its references to various other books and its quotes from the best thinkers of our civilization; The clarity and lucidity of the text; Its close attention to every aspect of Islam over its 1400-plus years of conflict with every other thought system in our world; The internal structure of the sects and legal systems of Islam, with special atttention to the problem of conflicts within the text of the Koran; And, most specially, the application of all of the above to today's world.

Although the section on the Crusades is not quite as good as that on Islam, it is still worth reading to "seriously" dispell the myths and violent falsehoods all too commonly put forth about the motives and behaviors of the Crusaders.

No person having any authority in our world should not read this work before dealing with Islam on any level.

How to evaluate the extent of the threat of "militant Muslims"?

Please follow along with me in some basic calculations as to the level of the present and future threat that “activist”, “jihadist”, Muslims represent to the world.

There are about One Billion (1,000,000,000) Muslims alive. If we eliminate, in good Muslim tradition, all females as meaningless, that still leaves us with 500-Million male muslims. I think we must assume that at least 80% of those male Muslims do believe, as commanded by their ideology or “faith” that: The Koran is the collection of the true, unalterable and absolute words and commands of God (Allah); The Hadith (The collected sayings of Mohammed) is a guide to right thinking and actions; And, that the Sharia (The codes of Islamic law) is the only correct legal rule and system in the world.

Those 400-million male Muslims are not necessarily a threat to us. But, we must note that such “faith” requires them to believe that it is correct to: Use aggressive war to spread “Islam”; Sexually use (ie Rape) female captives taken on jihad; Believe that there is a state of perpetual war between Muslims and all other persons; That all “unbelievers” and all women are entitled to only very inferior legal, social and political power or rights; It is correct to kill Jews anywhere and at any time; That anyone who insults the Koran or Mohammed must be killed (ie Murdered); That the same fate must be given to any Muslim who converts to another religion or, even by exposing such a person to the Bible or Sutras or other non-Islamic works, encourages such a conversion; That lying to or stealing from a non-believer is no crime or sin; That any attack by a Muslim, with a claim of defending his “faith” is encouraged, but any defensive action by a nonbeliever against a Muslim is a crime worthy of punishment; That “good Muslims” must either be on active and military jihad or support those who are, as a precondition to going to Paradise; That such support is as much, perhaps greater, an act of "charity" as supporting the poor or widows or orphans; That any treaty or peace or truce with “unbelievers” is only hudna and can be broken at any time, without warning for any reason whatsoever; That there is no non-Islamic government or government or laws which need be obeyed except under threat of force or for convenience's sake; And, many other like beliefs.

If we assume that only one-eigth of those “true believers” are of an age (16-to-35 years old) and geographic position where they could effect active and physical actions against non-Muslins or those Muslims who do not believe as they do, that still leaves us with

50-Million (50,000,000) high risk, potential, terrorists! Of those 50-Million persons, those who represent the greatest treat are those who live in non-Islamic nations, with strong free speech traditions, which have a history of welcoming strangers---Such as the United Kingdom, other Commonwealth Nations, Canada, France, The Netherlands, the Scandinavian countries and the United States of America !!!

The real Islamic threat is NOT some army of jihadists coming out of Turkey or North Africa or Egypt or Central Asia BUT from within our own free nations.

At some future time I will address dealing with that internal threat.

Worshiping Death: Islam & Securlar Humanism

It appears that secular humanism, the public face of atheism and “islam” both worship death. A reading of the Koran and of the other basic documents of that ideology presents the reader with an inordinate number of passages calling for the death of Jews, “unbelievers” and, in the spreading or “defense” of “islam”, the death of believers. A review of the 1400-year history of “islam's” use of aggressive war, genocide, retail murder, killing of women considered to have been impure and other forms of terrorism all support my contention here.

Secular humanism's arrogant support of abortion and euthanasia are its contributions to the common worship of death.

Even the “worst” of Eastern religions show only an indifference to death due to their common belief in reincarnation and typically have some “do no harm” or Karma cautions which discourage murder.

The Very Big Lie About "Islam"

“Islam is a religion of peace”-----Is one of the all time, big, lies. Even Joseph Paul Goebbels, Hitler's Minister of Propaganda, or many of the deluded voices who supported Stalin's Soviet Union could appreciate the magnitude of this, very critical, lie.

What? You do not agree with me? Let me dissect this “two lies in one” on as rational a basis as I can. My only question is do you have the intellectual honesty to continue?

First, is Islam “peaceful”? To know the truth about this you must, as I did, read both the basic texts (The Koran, the Hadith, being the sayings of Mohammed, and the Sharia, the codes of Islamic law), or as much of them were available to me and as are available to you. You must also read some basic, honest, history of Islam, especially one which addresses both its foundation, later development, expansion and interactions with other cultures and religions. (I specially recommend: The Sword Of The Prophet: Islam---history, theology, impact on the world; by Serge Trifkovic; Regina Orthodox Press; Boston, MA, USA; 2002.) If you are fortunate, you will have access to people of Armenian decent or those who recently lived in the South of The Sudan with whom to discuss this subject as they are likely to have such personal insights, as no book can provide, as to the real nature of Islam in practice.