Hugh Fitzgerald: A Few Thoughts on Muslims in the West

Is it somewhere written that the countries of the advanced West are required to admit Muslims into their lands, or to continue to endure their large-scale presence, no matter what information may come to light, with greater understanding as a result, of the meaning and menace of Islam? It is by now quite clear, to all who are paying attention both to the canonical texts (Qur’an, Hadith, Sira) of Islam, and to the attitudes and observable behavior of many Muslims, that there is something deeply worrisome about the ever-increasing numbers of Muslims in the Bilad al-kufr (Lands of the Infidels). And it is also clear to many that this has led to a situation, in Western Europe though not yet in America, that is far more unpleasant, expensive, and physically dangerous for the indigenous Infidels (and for other, non-Muslim, immigrants) than would be the case were there no such large-scale Muslim presence.

It may be impossible to completely end Muslim immigration to the West, but can it not be cut way back in the interests of security? We already know that there are tens of thousands of jihadis among recent Muslim immigrants to Europe. Even to monitor just one suspect around the clock requires at least three members of the police. It’s a terrifically expensive undertaking. We simply lack the manpower and money to monitor all those who require it.  Should we not return these Muslim non-citizens to their countries of origin rather than fail to monitor them, or monitor them only at great expense? On what theory are we required to allow them to stay? Similarly, can we not impose restrictions on money coming from Saudi Arabia and elsewhere that fund Wahhabi or other extremist mosques and madrasas, with their message of hatred for Infidels, all over the Western world? Can legislation be passed to allow for the monitoring of mosques, and stripping citizenship from those who by word or deed support Islamic terrorism, identifying such support as treason? Can we enforce the equality of women, and freedom of conscience, among Muslims in our own countries?  We are expected to believe that “diversity” is always and everywhere a societal good, though there is no evidence for this belief that amounts just to that  warm fuzzy  feeling that so often substitutes for thought. We need to take a much harder look at the impact of Muslims on our societies, instead of dwelling on the presumed but unproven benefits of “diversity.”

Is it impossible to create the conditions where True Believers in Islam, with all that that implies, may have to make a choice? If they remain in the Lands of the Infidels, they will discover how hard it can be to lead a “full Muslim life.” The mixing and equality of the sexes, in schools and sports (no more yielding to Muslim demands for “women only” hours at public pools), and at work, the banning of burkas and niqabs for security reasons, the security afforded apostates from Islam, the punishment of Muslim men who commit “honor killings,” the denial of Muslim prayer breaks in schools and workplaces, the public denouncing, and punishment, of imams who call for the mass killings of Jews, or Hindus, or Christians, the ending of tax breaks for any religious institution where such preaching goes on, new laws to punish anyone who publicly calls for such genocide, with both fines and prison terms as possible punishments — all this can severely  constrain the conduct of Muslim life. Some Muslims, in order to be able to freely lead a truly Islamic life, may rethink their plans to settle in the West and  instead may never leave their homelands, or if already living in the West, may decide to return to the Muslim lands from whence they came.

Islam is not mainly, or merely, a “religion” as we understand that term. It is a religion and a politics, a Total Belief-System. If we come to view Islam as the threat it is to the legal and political institutions that have been created in our own societies over time — tolerant, liberal, with equality of the sexes and equal treatment for minorities enshrined in the law — that we have inherited, and that we have a duty to preserve, then we will be far more willing to consider, and then to take, the kind of measures that have been taken, within recent memory, by a tolerant and advanced people, who decided they were under no obligation to again endure, for the sake of some theoretical “standard of tolerance,” a situation that they could remedy once and for all. I am thinking of the case of the Czechs, and those Europeans of the civilized old school, the Czech leaders Jan Masaryk and Eduard Benes. Their government passed, and then put into force, what came to be called the Benes Decree in 1946. By that decree, the Czech government decided to expel the “Sudeten Germans” who had lived, for hundreds of years, along what was then the border separating the Czechs from the lands of Deutschtum, These ethnic Germans had before the war allowed themselves to be used by Hitler to whip up Western opinion against the Czechs, and during the war, the Sudeteners were to a large degree supporters of Nazi Germany, treated by the Nazis as German citizens, and given, for example, the larger food rations to which Germans, but not Czechs, were entitled. Benes and Masaryk did not want the Czechs to ever again have to endure, much less yield to, demands from their German population.  So  they expelled them, well aware that not every Sudetener was a threat, but that enough of them had been, and were,  to justify such an act. No one then thought, and no one  has thought since, that the Czechs were wrong to expel the Sudeteners.  Why should the Western world, similarly, provide citizenship to Muslims, whose deeply-held beliefs are not consonant with, but opposed to, Western values? Shall we simply ignore the evidence, pretend that everyone shares those values, and hope for the best? Should those who believe deeply, sincerely, in the Qur’anic commandment to conduct violent Jihad, be allowed to remain in our countries? Why? On what theory?

All those Muslims who recognize a duty, because of opinions they have expressed or posted or shared with others, either to participate themselves, or to support others who do, in the “Jihad” or struggle to remove all obstacles to the spread, and then the dominance, of Islam, ought to be carefully examined, before being given citizenship, to see if they are likely to pose a permanent danger to the legal and political institutions of this country. And if they have already acquired citizenship, but either taken part in Jihad warfare themselves, or given or expressed support to others who engage in violent Jihad, we have a right to take that citizenship away.

Those Muslims who do not agree that they have such a duty of Jihad and whose Islam is more a matter of inherited cultural baggage than deep belief – people are born into states and societies and families suffused with it, and do not realize that in non-Islamic societies they are free to leave Islam — should have our government make clear to them that apostasy is their right, and that they are safe, in the West, to abandon Islam for another or for no religion, if they so wish, and no harm will come to them. Some may at once take up the offer. And given that guarantee, many more should now be willing to listen, no longer constrained by fear, to Christian proselytizers eager to make new converts.

Still others, despite their being ill-treated by other Muslims, may wish to defend the faith, out of some kind of residual loyalty to their own families of Believers, or to the sect from which they came. It is amazing to see, for example, how Ahmadi Muslims, though themselves the perennial targets of persecution and even murder, in Muslim lands, by those  Muslims (especially in Pakistan) who consider Ahmadis to be Infidels rather than true Muslims, nonetheless remain stout defenders of Islam. They never complain to non-Muslims about their treatment, as if that were akin to hanging out Islam’s dirty laundry. The Ahmadis have shown themselves perfectly willing to misstate Islam’s contents when they participate, as a significant  number of Ahmadis do, in those “Ask-A-Muslim-Anything” efforts. Misrepresenting what is so clearly in the texts, and that form the tenets, of Islam, is hardly the way for Ahmadis to alleviate the fears of Infidels. We have a right to expect Muslims not to hide the uncomfortable truths about the ideology of Islam, and we should be suspicious of those who continue to twist or deny the clear meaning of the Qur’anic verses, even if, like the Ahmadis, they are themselves generally peaceful. Non-Muslims could show up at these affairs, and suggest to the Ask-Me-Anything Muslims that they ought to be working on turning  the “prescription” of Jihad (a commandment applicable to all time and space) in the Qur’an into “description” (meant to describe wars against non-Muslims at a particular time and place), which may be the only possible way to “reform” Islam and relieve non-Muslims of their justified worries and suspicions.

Those who continue today to call themselves Muslims (and not “cultural Muslims” or “Muslim-for-identification-purposes-only” Muslims), should ordinarily be held to know the contents of the texts (Qur’an, Hadith, Sira), and therefore the teachings of Islam, and arising naturally from them, the attitudes of Muslims, and the atmospherics of states, societies, families suffused with Islam. There are still many Infidels who don’t want to hear any unpleasant truths about Islam (Robert Spencer’s extraordinary experience at Stanford is just the latest example), but at the same time, other Infidels have been educating themselves about Islam, thanks in large part to the Internet, and it is getting harder to hide the truth from that ever-expanding number of well-informed Infidels in the West. Muslims should realize that they should not encourage willful ignorance among non-Muslims, if they wish to be trusted, nor insult the intelligence of those who have educated themselves, and cannot be fooled.  Someone who today calls himself a Muslim has an affirmative duty, as the lawyers say, to forthrightly acknowledge what the Qur’an teaches about Jihad warfare, while declaring that as far as he is concerned, the doctrine of violent Jihad is no longer acceptable, but must be re-interpreted as a description of what went on in early Islam.

There are a wide variety of reasons why Muslims might fail to acknowledge the commandment to wage Jihad, or to admit to what Muslims have done in conducting Jihad over 1400 years. In some cases this may reflect not a desire to deliberately mislead, but lack of information. Not all 1.5 billion Muslims are equally informed. Some are simple souls, many are illiterate, who just don’t know what is part of their faith or what has been committed in the name of Islam. Others may not wish to know, preferring to be kept in the dark for fear of what they might learn. Still others know perfectly well what is in the Qur’an and Hadith, but are determined to keep that knowledge from non-Muslims; these are the sly and sinister defenders of the faith, people such as Tariq Ramadan.

Here are some of the reasons why a Muslim (or an “Islamochristian”) might not recognize certain home truths about Islam:

1) Ignorance of history is widespread among Muslims and non-Muslims alike. Why should we assume that the real history of Muslim conquest — as with the mass killings of tens of millions of Hindus, or the Arab slave trade that claimed 80 million victims — is known to all Muslims? How many Westerners are ignorant  of their own history? What does the average American know, say, about European history between 500 and 1800 A.D.? Why should Muslims be any different?

2) Ignorance of what happened, after conquest by Muslims,, to so many lands and peoples. How did islamization,, and then arabization,  of the conquered populations, proceed over time?. Few non-Arab Muslims recognize how Arabs are privileged in Islam. But just think: Muslims prostrate themselves in prayer toward Mecca, in Arabia, five times a day; they read the Qur’an, ideally, in Arabic; they often memorize and recite passages in Arabic even if they do not really know the language; they make the hajj to Mecca, at least once in their lives, if financially able; if not Arabs, they take Arab names, and assume pseudo-Arab identities, while some even go so far as to adopt false Arab lineages, calling themselves “Sayeeds” or descendants of the Prophet; they copy the ways of seventh-century Arabs in dress and manners. Islam has always been, as the writer Anwar Sheikh maintained, the “Arab national religion” or, put more bluntly, “a vehicle for Arab supremacism.”

3) Filial piety, including memories of sympathetic older relatives who were quietly pious Muslims and did not seem to wish harm to anyone, can delay or soften criticism of Islam. The famous apostate, and now fierce critic of Islam, Magdi Allam, writes movingly of the simple piety of his elderly parents, and it is clear that their example did cause him to delay announcing his own apostasy, but once he had moved from Egypt to Italy, and especially after the death of his parents, he began to relentlessly denounce Islam, pulling no punches, as he still does today.

4) The desire to spare oneself knowledge of certain truths about Islam that could call into question the entire value of what has been, in so many ways, central to one’s sense of self or, rather, of the self immersed in the umma, or community, of Believers. How difficult it is for those who live not in free societies, but in Muslim lands, to see Islam steadily and whole. For they are subject to the constant din of Islamic propaganda, in societies suffused with Islam, where this total belief-system offers both a simple explanation of the universe, and a complete regulation of life, and thus a comforting way to organize and make sense of the universe.

5) Among Arab Muslims, their ethnic identity reinforces a desire to protect, to defend, not to question, Islam — and that can be true even of non-Muslim Arabs, those I call “islamochristians.” One thinks, for example, of Christian “Palestinians” who parrot, because they have internalized, the Muslim view of Israel and of Jews. These “islamochristians” thereby hope to be accepted by the Muslims among whom they must live. They choose not to take seriously what the Qur’an says about Christians; they ignore the ominous Muslim chant of “first the Saturday people, then the Sunday people” that expresses the anti-Christian hatred among Muslims that is to be satisfied once “the Jews” have been taken care of.

These are explanations, not justifications, of varieties of Muslim responses, of both real and willful ignorance, of misplaced loyalties, of the defensive desire to protect, of the tug of family and tribe, of the fear of apostasy, of the ethnic identity that carries with it loyalty to Islam even among some non-Muslims. But they should give pause to those who insist that every Muslim knows exactly what all other Muslims know about Islam, or that those who remain loyal to it do so for the same reasons. It’s not so simple. There’s plenty to ponder.

Coming back to the effect of a large Islamic presence on our societies, let’s think first of the cost. More than $1 trillion dollars has been spent on homeland security alone since 9/11 (and another $7 billion on wars abroad that were prompted by the felt need to clean out terrorists from the Middle East and Central Asia). Then think of how our way of life, because of the large-scale Muslim presence and the consequent threat of terrorism, has been considerably altered. Think of the hundreds of millions of man-hours now wasted because we must appear at airports, for security reasons, at least three hours before our scheduled flights. Think of the ubiquitous security checks, before we get on a plane or train, think of the security details on those planes, trains, busses, subway stations and subway cars..Think of the enhanced security now required at concerts, sports arenas, night clubs, hotels, army recruitment centers, national monuments, government buildings, famous pedestrian walkways (as in Nice, Barcelona, New York), hospitals, universities, churches, synagogues, all because of the threat of Muslim terrorists. Think of all the events,too, that have been cancelled because of terrorist threats. Many Christmas markets have been cancelled in Europe,  the latest being the Christmas market held on the Champs-Elysées, in the very heart of Paris. Concerts and sports events, too, have been cancelled or postponed, especially in the immediate wake of Muslim terror attacks. And these terrorists against whom we require all this security are not, we know, misunderstanding Islam, but zealously following the Qur’an — e.g., Qur’an 3:151, 4:89, 8:12, 8:60 — and Hadith (Muhammad’s “I have been made victorious through terror”).  The  call for qitaal (combat) against the Infidel, the jihad commanded in 109 Qur’anic verses, is held by many Muslims to legitimately include, along with conventional combat, what we non-Muslims have no difficulty in describing as “terrorism.” These texts calling for “striking terror” in the hearts of Infidels have not been twisted or distorted, but  taken literally, are correctly understood.

Meanwhile, the march of Islam is promoted by using, along with terrorism,  non-violent instruments of Jihad– Da’wa (the Call to Islam), demographic conquest, deployment of the Money Weapon (all of which have the same goal as terrorism, and in the long run may be even more effective in spreading Islam). Da’wa — the Call to Islam — has been effective in the prisons of the Western world, where individual prisoners convert because they want to join “the Muslim gang,” the toughest of all the gangs, which affords them protection in the violent prison environment. In the U.S. alone, last year 40,000 prisoners converted to Islam. Little is done to counter this Da’wa, though much could be done if there were sufficient will and resources. Since many of these prison converts to Islam are black, a campaign by Christian ministers, possibly accompanied by black refugees from the Sudan, former slaves of northern Arabs, ought to bring prisoners information about the horrendous Arab slave trade carried on in Africa for centuries, with 80 million black African victims of that trade. There never was, nor could have been, a Muslim William Wilberforce, because  Muhammad himself bought and sold and traded in slaves, which means that Muslims have always regarded slavery as legitimate. Slavery finally ended in the Muslim Arab lands, but only under terrific Western pressure; it wasn’t until 1962 that slavery ended in Saudi Arabia.

These, then, are some of the things we ought to be thinking of doing:

1) cutting back, if not eliminating entirely (only because it would be politically impossible), Muslim immigration. At the same time, deliberately raising the number of immigrants who have been victimised by Muslims, as Assyrian and Chaldean Christians from Iraq, Copts from Egypt, and Hindus and Buddhists from Bangladesh. Not only do these people deserve rescue, but once in the West they will offer convincing personal testimony as to how Muslims treat non-Muslims.

2) denying American citizenship to those Muslims who are not yet citizens, and whom we have reason to believe support the doctrine of violent Jihad. They need not have taken part in such Jihads; it is enough that they support them.

3) stripping American citizenship from anyone found to have taken part in, or who otherwise lends support to, terrorism planned or carried out against our citizens.

4) halting the flow of money from abroad, especially from Saudi Arabia, that pays for mosques and madrasas, and for the salaries of imams and teachers, where we have evidence that violent Jihad, or hatred of non-Muslims, is preached in those mosques or taught in those madrasas. In some cases, if we find repeated violations of our laws concerning the preaching of genocide or extolling of Jihad,  those mosques and madrasas may be permanently shut down.

5) helping to arrange private funding (to avoid first amendment problems)  for campaigns of counter-dawa, especially in prisons, where African-American prisoners in particular should be informed about the massive Arab slave trade in Africa, Mohammed’s role as a slave-owner, and the consequent toleration of slavery in Muslim Arab lands.

These are some of the measures that  deserve to be considered and that, one hopes, will be adopted. When it comes to Islam, the Western world has for decades tried a large number of carrots. Now it’s time to try the stick.

The Truth Must be Told

Your contribution supports independent journalism

Please take a moment to consider this. Now, more than ever, people are reading Geller Report for news they won't get anywhere else. But advertising revenues have all but disappeared. Google Adsense is the online advertising monopoly and they have banned us. Social media giants like Facebook and Twitter have blocked and shadow-banned our accounts. But we won't put up a paywall. Because never has the free world needed independent journalism more.

Everyone who reads our reporting knows the Geller Report covers the news the media won't. We cannot do our ground-breaking report without your support. We must continue to report on the global jihad and the left's war on freedom. Our readers’ contributions make that possible.

Geller Report's independent, investigative journalism takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce. But we do it because we believe our work is critical in the fight for freedom and because it is your fight, too.

Please contribute here.

or

Make a monthly commitment to support The Geller Report – choose the option that suits you best.

• $25.00 here
• $50.00 here
• $75.00 here
• $100.00 here
• $250.00 here

0 0 votes

Article Rating

58 Comments

Oldest

Newest Most Voted

Inline Feedbacks

View all comments

Duke

6 years ago

I HATE TO SAY IT, BUT I THINK IT’S TOO LATE. THE ELITES HAVE SUCCEEDED IN CONTAMINATING THE ENTIRE WORLD WITH ISLAM. THOSE MUSLIM INVADERS WILL DESTROY THE NATION STATE FOR THE ELITES. THEN WHAT?

0

Suresh

6 years ago

Reply to  Duke

Its never too late and most of the points to counter islam/jihad I’ve been saying for years now.

If that is not done expect country to become the next sweden- another Left/Liberal created islamic hellhole.

swedish police is so overworked, outnumbered that the Police chief is begging for help from his own govt http://bit.ly/2s75qAn

But they are too busy bringing in more jihadis and dumb Left/liberal women I heard are allowing themselves be their sex slaves so they won’t be killed !

0

Simon

6 years ago

Reply to  Suresh

I agree that it isn’t too late. However, the cost in blood of expelling them increases as time and their numbers increase.

0

Larenzo1

6 years ago

Reply to  Simon

The Muslims in this nation could be expelled without that much problem and most of the blood that would be spilled would be theirs if they do not want to obey our laws. We have the right as a nation to declare a person no longer welcome and to label organizations like islam and the Jim Jones group cults. Then deport!

0

Larenzo1

6 years ago

Reply to  Duke

Not really.

0

Alleged-Comment

6 years ago

Reply to  Duke

So frick ‘n pretty! LOL!

0

JayPee

6 years ago

Law of the jungle
You either slaughter these pigs or
They will slaughter you
The longer you cowardly wait
The more of you they will slaughter

0

Mahou Shoujo

6 years ago

The best thought of muslims in the west, is no muslims withe west or anywhere else either.

0

Dennis

6 years ago

Reply to  Mahou Shoujo

Mahou, you, like Pamela, and I, have regularly and forthrightly expressed our real and rational concerns about the belief system that calls itself Islam, and I commend you for the courage to say what needs to be said. The writer of this article also brilliantly, logically and honestly sets forth all the facts that need to be included in the equation when analyzing the obvious problem represented by the people of the Muslim world. I was impressed with his commentary that non-Muslims seem to ignore the dangers they face, a statement he made concerning the students who disrupted Spencer’s recent speech at Stanford. That happenstance is serious evidence of just how dangerous things are when what are supposed to be intelligent students act in such a manner as to refuse to hear out the history of what they face from Islam. Very Sad! Furthermore, the only comment that I would add to this writers brilliant article, is that if Jihad is promoted and preached at any Mosque, the consequences should result in the prosecution and then the deportation of the promoters of such vile conduct, followed by some act as would be performed by the Israeli’s who burn down the house of actual terrorists. Simply stated, wherever that preaching is found and proved, the consequences should be significantly more dramatic, as the terror that they are committing or fostering has proven to be. My hope is that the free world will come to grips with what is set forth in this article, and finally take those steps that are necessary to save our societies from this MADNESS.

0

conan_drum

6 years ago

Reply to  Dennis

I do not know who you are but to compare yourself and especially Mahou S to Pamel G is quite egregious. MS in particular is a bigot who continually abuses whole nations for the actions of a few politicians. How would you like it if a European abused all US citizens for the actions of Trump for instance? Or accused all Democrats for the statements of Hilary Clinton. Around 50% of American voters supported either of the two candidates. Obama was elected twice, does that make every American stupid? You do appear to understand how democracy works. I must add that MS is unfortunately not the only bigot who writes on this column. Just read comments below.

0

Larenzo1

6 years ago

Reply to  conan_drum

You are the worst the greatest threat and those like you ,to this nation and the world, Defending yourself from a despicable death cult is not bigotry.

0

Dennis

6 years ago

Reply to  conan_drum

You sound very mush like the ultra liberal press and those politicians within the free world who refuse to recognize the evil truth of Islam and refuse to take appropriate action to deal with that patent truth, and because of your philosophy, I believe that you are allowing yourself to suffer the probability of monumental injury. Personally, I do not consider my self a bigot. The term itself is defined as “one who obstinately is wedded to a particular belief, and is a person who is intolerant towards those holding different opinions.” The underlying factor that must be present is a sense of unfairness or irrationality, if you adopt views that are intolerant towards others. Islamophobia is defined as an irrational fear of those of Muslim persuasion. I admit to being Islamophobic, but I do not see my fears as being without merit. To the contrary, I believe I have every right to be fearful of the belief system that is Islam, as the acts of heinous terror continue unabated, and I have come to the conclusion that our free societies are not taking the actions necessary to “combat” this terrorism. Sure, their are many Muslims out there that are not believers in Jihadi conduct, but as long as the Islamic world continues to promote and teach that its books support such terrorist conduct, I will be fearful of these believers, who I believe cannot assimilate into our free societies, and I consider my fear to be very rational. You , on the other hand, I see as being like the three monkeys, who refuse to see the evil, hear the evil, or speak out against the evil that is represented in the dominating, Aryan, antiquated belief system that is Islam.

0

pandainc

6 years ago

Reply to  Dennis

“Personally, I do not consider my self a bigot.” Nor I. I do disagree with your comments about islamophobia (a BS term invented by fellow travelers do denigrate anyone who opposes islam). A phobia is a fear. They just disgust me.

0

Cai

6 years ago

Reply to  conan_drum

Idiot!!

0

pandainc

6 years ago

Reply to  conan_drum

… once in the West they (Copts, Buddhists, Hindi) will offer convincing personal testimony as to how Muslims treat non-Muslims. Conan, why do you thing they are NOT being allowed to immigrate? One is not bigoted because one opposes a clear and present danger with vehemence. They breed like rabbits intentionally to overcome natives politically. They (the righteous of them (i.e., regular mosque attenders) support the mosque financially. 1/8th of the givings go to support jihad, did you know that? Do you even care?

0

IzlamIsTyranny

6 years ago

Reply to  conan_drum

R U suggesting it’s possible for anyone to be a bigot against f’ing muslums worm? Why don’t you FO to a muslum state and cry to the kafir al najjis being systematically persecuted/enslaved/raped/murdered by f’ing muslums.
Take your bigotry allegations and your disguised muslum apologia and shove it where the sun don’t shine.

0

Mahou Shoujo

6 years ago

Reply to  Mahou Shoujo

It will come to that, eventually even the western european worm will turn.

0

Drew the Infidel

6 years ago

Reply to  Mahou Shoujo

You’ve got my vote, sister!

0

Cai

6 years ago

Reply to  Mahou Shoujo

When those charged with our safety in the West either refuse to or are unable to take the steps to ensure our safety, what other choice is there?

0

Toledo Steel

6 years ago

1. Deport every muslim.
2. Destroy every mosque.
3. Never let down your guard.

0

Howard Hyman

6 years ago

Reply to  Toledo Steel

A muzzie Mosque is nothing but a HIDEOUT for murderers.

PER THE TORAH—–IF A muzzrat comes to kill you—-KILL THEM FIRST!!

0

IzlamIsTyranny

6 years ago

Reply to  Toledo Steel

Thumbs up!
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-qUH2sD4GWB0/UUn5xBphLjI/AAAAAAAAA2o/MMYWv7n8sNw/s1600/thumb-up-terminator+pablo+M+R.jpg

0

D

AlgorithmicAnalyst

6 years ago

Will you allow animals and reptiles like donkeys, pigs, snakes and scorpions to enter your home? No, you will drive them away and close the door …

0

Iman lynn zarina

6 years ago

Reply to  AlgorithmicAnalyst

Correct and agreed

0

Charles Martel

6 years ago

A Constitutional amendment by the states, is possible under Article V of the Constitution to at least remove the 1st Amendment protections of Islam as an acceptable religion, bypassing the corrupt sell-out congress. See the my italics:

“The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress . .

Thus two-thirds of our state legislatures must be for a Convention for proposing such an Amendment, which would thereafter also require a three-fourths ratification vote by the states (Congress is out of it). If only enough of our state legislatures could be motivated to do this then Islam can be treated like an absurd & dangerous cult.

0

Cai

6 years ago

Reply to  Charles Martel

That it is! (absurd and dangerous cult)

0

Simon

6 years ago

Yes, of course. The presence of Muslims in the West is quite clearly an existential threat to the culture and indigenous people. This has been known since Islam was first closely encountered by Europeans. Efforts were made to keep them out or expel them as a matter of common sense. We seem to have forgotten that in modern times and have paid the price for it.

0

Michelle

6 years ago

Historically ONLY one thing has ever slowed islam: far greater applied violence(with the use of pigs) and the removal of their rights as humans. This means that any other tactic that expects ethical reciprocation from them will and always has failed as they see them as weaknesses. IMHO as all of the good attributes of humans: charity, benevolence, deontology, compassion etc., are NOT reciprocated when applied to muslims then they have to be classed as nonhuman and the ideology outlawed.
Once the fear of punishment for apostasy is removed I feel that many , many muslims would leave islam and most of these would agree that ONLY draconian punishments will deter the remainder(do read the BBC article on the forced subjugation and conversion of the Sumatran pagan tribes by muslims…naturally they say nothing about the ethics of it).
Once we start to remove them instantly the fervour will cool after a year or so. Of course the hard core will remain and wait for us to slacken but by then they should all be in real concentration camps and any who are violent should be removed. the remainder can either die or move back to their muslim sewer. Naturally all madrassa and mosques should be removed.
If this does not occur via state approval then vigilantism will occur and the crack down upon those will ignite a civil war with the left still licking the muslim backside. I see the Left as the primary culprits and deserving of equal punishment for their actions & inactions here and quite honestly I feel that not a few should suffer the same fate as their muslim mates.

0

Cai

6 years ago

Reply to  Michelle

Sooooo depressingly true and as you say the suicidal dumb Leftists are the primary culprits, they are the conduit of the barbarians into the West to destroy it. Without Leftists we wouldn’t be in this violent mess.

0

Alleged-Comment

6 years ago

He seems to acquiesce to Moslems and ignorant of a SINGLE verse in Genesis where Yahuah altered the DNA of the Moslem. He is UNAPPROACHABLE!!

What must be done can be said in a paragraph or two. Longer then that shows you are confused about the whole issue. of who YOU are and who THEY are.

The same way they came here is the same way they go. Boat, plane, walking. If you feel bad about that then there is ONE solution that you must stick too.

Moslems are to be no more than 1-2% of the population. Whether expanding or detracting that number remains constant.. But I prefer none be here except for limited political liaisons.

0

DeJuan Chan

6 years ago

A Few Thoughts on Muslims in the West…

EXTERMINATE THEM ALL !

0

D

garry pollack

6 years ago

Reply to  DeJuan Chan

most! mooselims R as much, or more the victims of islam than we R… wimin, gays, apostates… but I will compromise w/U… all the imams & assorted leadership! Be my guest! That mite be a few million? Strike them @ their necks! They won’t even object… because they will get to their 72 raisins, guaranteed!

0

marlene

6 years ago

Reply to  garry pollack

ALL!

0

D

garry pollack

6 years ago

Reply to  marlene

If U reflect on that… U just qualified ureself as a N@zi mass murder… & the “best” of all time!

0

jim

6 years ago

The whole world would be much more peaceful if Muhammad had never been born and if there were no Islam.

0

Larenzo1

6 years ago

Reply to  jim

Well yes. I recall reading about Hitler and his supposed justification for sending troops into the Sudetenland to free and protect those sorry individuals when I was thirteen years old and that was the year JFK was assassinated. Have read it many times.

0

D

garry pollack

6 years ago

Reply to  Larenzo1

& over the next 4 yrs the Sudets showed their true colors!

0

Moham Muslime

6 years ago

This Anwar Sheikh mentiined in the essay is no “writer.” He is a professor of Marxism (Political Science) at The New School, a college in NY. He has supported and continues to support PLO terrorism and specific terrorists. His students comprise the minions of violent leftists and jihadis. He is no “writer”!

0

Moham Muslime

6 years ago

Reply to  Moham Muslime

Oh, my mistake. This article refers to Sheikh and I mistook that for Shaikh.

0

IzlamIsTyranny

6 years ago

Reply to  Moham Muslime

Wrong, the Anwar Sheikh Fitzgerald is referring to is dead. The author Fitzgerald is referring to wrote: Islam, the Arab Imperialism and was a muslum convert to Hinduism.

0

Moham Muslime

6 years ago

Reply to  IzlamIsTyranny

You are correct. I noticed my error and posted a correction immediately.

0

Drew the Infidel

6 years ago

I hate to be the bearer of sad news but no one living outside the US has a constitutional right to come here. It is a conditional privilege, and those conditions include a background check and a loyalty oath.

0

marlene

6 years ago

Reply to  Drew the Infidel

True! Our Constitution clearly describes the types of people who are welcome to immigrate by setting forth criteria, qualifications and conditions for entry. Accordingly, no muslim in the world qualifies for even entry into the US, let alone being unconstitutional permitted to stay, become nationalized or hold any political position whatsoever, Every leftard who has encouraged and abetted muslim immigration has violated our Constitution, and will continue to do so if we the people don’t stop them.

0

Drew the Infidel

6 years ago

Reply to  marlene

There is also 8 US Code Section 1182 entitled “Inadmissible Aliens” which accords sole discretion over who comes in or not to the President. Also, the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952.

All the libtards who call Trump’s travel ban a “muslime ban” conveniently overlook the fact that all the named countries are failed states.

0

marlene

6 years ago

Reply to  Drew the Infidel

Yes, that’s true. Thanks for posting it.

0

Larenzo1

6 years ago

Absolutely superb column these actions should be implemented at once!

0

Dave

6 years ago

Bravo Mr Charles Martell!

0

APH

6 years ago

Really great article. I agree with it. Too bad our leftist politicians wont ever listen too this kind of common sense.

0

Schinderhannes Schinderhannes

6 years ago

Very well written article.

0

D

garry pollack

6 years ago

time to try the stick? ok! because this will make no difference to them… then we can try the bludgeon!

0

Ron rockit

6 years ago

Getting left wing Jews out of the business of defending moslems would be a good start. We need to deport as many moslems as possible. We need to end this practice of Anchor Babies.

0

Rude Richard

6 years ago

Islam is the enemy of the whole non-muslim world and must not be allowed in non-muslim country’s…

0

D

1PierreMontagne1

6 years ago

The author asks a lot of common sense questions but the problem is much bigger.
1. Our human rights legislation in the western secular nations “Stupidly ” do not allow us to discriminate against any religion. SO we cannot bar Muslim immigration.
2. The amorphous Islamic State led by the Islamic brotherhood sees Islamic Migration as the means to for Islam to conquer the world.
3. The west in jettisoning Christianity for secularism has like ancient Troy jettisoned Common sense. and like ancient Troy has hauled the Trojan Horse of Islam into western civilization and culture – labeling it as the Gift of Islam.
4. When fools affirm Islam into non-Islamic culture. Islams eventual destruction and slaughter of that society leaves no one alive to blame for the folly.

We even see today our foolish politicians and media claiming those that kill and behead (in the name of Allah) are not Muslim.

Donald Trump is the only world leader taking a stand against Islamic Hegemony
Little wonder the President of S/Korea call Donald Trump the leader of the world

0

Howard Hyman

6 years ago

Listen to G-d.!! EXPEL ALL OF THESE ENEMY VERMIN—-BAR THEM ALL FROM ENTRY! EXPEL THOSE THAT ARE ALREADY HERE.
G-d, in Genesis 16:12 exposes these arabs for who they are—-VIOLENT WARLIKE SAVAGES. They contribute NOTHING POSITIVE.

G-d told Abraham to send them all FAR AWAY!!

0

Howard Hyman

6 years ago

Reply to  Howard Hyman

IN SPITE OF WHAT THE LYING LEFTISTS CLAIM—-NOT ALL PEOPLE ARE THE SAME.

These vermin must be kept out or destroyed!!

0

Realist

6 years ago

The author speaks the truth but those in power to make the kind of decisions he speaks of will never turn their backs on the Muslims because they see them only as votes in their political war. The politically correct will never dare offend those who stand to destroy us.

0

IzlamIsTyranny

6 years ago

Muslums have to go, lock, stock and barrel and so do muslum collaborators. The Burma solution is the only solution to the Jew hating, vile, violent, totalitarian, fascist ideology called islum. The muslums are clearly engaged in asymmetric warfare.

0

jerrys

6 years ago

obama was the greatest islamic victory over civilization! Until we see him hanging from a noose we have no hope of avoiding total subjugation.

0