Five Interesting Historical Facts About Islam

Thanks to Citizen Warrior

WHILE READING about things totally unrelated to the counterjihad movement, I have occasionally come across some interesting historical facts about Islam. I was surprised to discover that Islam had a hand in many important historical events I already knew about without ever knowing Islam had anything to do with them. Here are a few of the most interesting:

1. The creation of the U.S. Marine Corps was initiated in response to Islamic warriors. The Barbary Coast pirates were following in Mohammad’s footsteps, raiding caravans (in this case, oceangoing ships), taking slaves, capturing people to hold for ransom, and demanding “protection money” from any kafirs who didn’t want to be raided. This had been going on for centuries along the North African Mediterranean coastline.

Any ships that wanted to do business in the Mediterranean were at risk. Many European countries did the easy thing and paid the protection money to the Muslims to avoid being raided, which, of course, helped fund their operations against anyone who wasn’t paying. The U.S. did not have enough military resources to protect its ships, so it paid the protection money too. This bothered Thomas Jefferson. Before he was president, when he was an ambassador to France, Jefferson had a chance to meet with an ambassador from Tripoli, and he asked why Tripoli did this. The Muslim explained it was written in the Koran.

So Thomas Jefferson did something every leader of the free world should do: He bought himself a Koran and read it. Then when he became president, he knew what he needed to do: He formed the United States Navy, created the Marine Corps, and sent them to the shores of Tripoli, where they soundly defeated the Muslim warriors.

This was the first foreign war fought by the United States. America’s victory was the beginning of the end of the “Barbary Coast Pirates.” The military aggressiveness of Islamic countries remained contained and weakened for over a century.

Read more about that here: Why Did President Jefferson Read the Quran?

2. The New World was discovered because of Islam. Christopher Columbus was looking for a new trade route to the East. But why was he looking for a trade route?

During the Second Jihad, Islam invaded Central Asia and defeated Constantinople in 1453, cutting off the overland route for Europeans. Islamic armies continued their jihad northward, and conquered much of what is now Eastern Europe, until they were finally stopped at the gates of Vienna in 1683. Read more: The Second Major Wave of Jihad: the Turks, 1071-1683.

Europe had been trading with the Far East for centuries, and their old overland route now went through territory that was hostile and dangerous to anybody but Muslims. The economy of Europe was threatened.

So, in 1492, the year Islam was finally defeated in Spain, ending Islam’s 780-year occupation, Columbus set off to find a passage to the Far East by boldly sailing West into the unknown. Desperate times call for desperate measures.

3. The .45 caliber 1911 semiautomatic pistol was created to stop Islamic warriors. From 1902 until 1913, the United States fought a war with the “Moro Warriors” in the Philippines. These Islamic warriors were named “Moros” by the Spanish. Their unstoppability was legendary. “In one instance,” writes Robert Boatman, “a Moro warrior received 14 bullet wounds in five minutes, three of which penetrated his brain, and yet he fought on.”

At the time the army was using .38 caliber guns, which were unable to stop the Moros, so in 1906, they began testing different guns to find something better. In 1911, they chose the .45 caliber semiautomatic pistol. It had enough stopping power to kill even a Moro warrior with one shot. Read more about this interesting piece of history here, here and here.

4. The Great Pyramid of Giza looks unfinished because of Muslims. The pyramid was once covered by a smooth, beautifully polished layer of white stone. This outer layer was removed by Muslims, who used the white stone for mosques and palaces, leaving the ancient pyramids with their somewhat unfinished appearance.

The physicist, John Zajac, wrote: “This protective covering was made up of…hard, white limestone, similar to marble but superior in hardness and in durability against the elements…The casing stones, 144,000 in all, were so brilliant that they could literally be seen from the mountains of Israel hundreds of miles away…The people of the area had viewed the pyramid and its polished stones with awe for centuries. But when a 13th century earthquake loosened some of these casing stones, the Arabs recognized a great quarry of precut stones that could be used to finish off palaces and mosques. For instance, the casing stones were used to rebuild the new city of El Kaherah plus Cairo mosques and palaces, including the Mosque of Sultan Hasan.”

Historically, this is Islamic standard operating procedure. Wherever Islam established itself throughout the world, it destroyed or defaced monuments that represented the previous (conquered) culture and replaced it with Islamic structures and mosques. Afghanistan used to be Buddhist. Turkey used to be Christian. Pakistan used to be Hindu. The former cultures and any symbols of them were annihilated and replaced by Islam.

5. The Crusades were a limp, late, defensive response to four hundred years of Islamic war against what was then largely Christian lands (the Middle East, Northern Africa, and Europe). Four of the five main centers of Christianity, including the Byzantium and Constantiople, were eventually conquered by the Islamic warriors’ relentless conquests, and the countries were forcibly converted into Islamic states. But before the Crusades, Byzantium was still fighting to defend itself, and repeatedly appealed to Rome for help.

The different nations of Europe were largely competitors with each other. They were not a united force — far from it — but the Pope thought he could unify Europeans if he made it a matter of “defending Christians,” so that’s how he made his appeal. It helped unite Europeans against a common threat, and it may have saved Europe from the forcible Islamization suffered by the nations of the Middle East, part of India, and North Africa. Read more: What About the Crusades?

Here’s another interesting historical tidbit about Islam’s influence: The defense of Europe during the Crusades was devastatingly expensive, and the Church of Rome tried many ways to raise funds. Some of these fundraising efforts were deeply offensive to Martin Luther, so he intitiated the Protestant Reformation.

Islam has had a profound impact on important historical events throughout its history, and it is still being felt today.

Geert Wilders Comes to Nashville

h/t Tundra Tabloids

A Warning to America

Speech Geert Wilders, Cornerstone Church , Nashville , 12 May 2011

Dear friends from Tennessee. I am very happy to be in your midst today. I am happy and proud to be in this impressive church.

My friends, I am here to speak words of truth and freedom.

Do you know why America is in a better state than Europe? Because you enjoy more freedom than Europeans.

And do you know why Americans enjoy more freedom than Europeans? Because you are still allowed to tell the truth.

In Europe and Canada people are dragged to court for telling the truth about islam.

I, too, have been dragged to court. I am an elected member of the house of representatives in the Netherlands. I am currently standing in court like a common criminal for saying that islam is a dangerous totalitarian ideology rather than a religion.

The court case is still pending, but I risk a jail sentence of 16 months.

Last week, my friend Lars Hedegaard, a journalist from Denmark, was fined because in a private conservation, which was recorded without his knowing, he had criticised the way women are treated in islamic societies.

Recently, another friend, Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, a human rights activist from Austria, was fined because she had criticised islam’s founder Muhammad. She had said that Muhammad was a pedophile because he had married a 6-year old girl and raped her when she was 9.

Unfortunately, there are many similar cases.

I am especially happy to be in your midst because here I can say what I want to say without having to fear that I will be dragged to court upon leaving this church.

My dear American friends, you cannot imagine how we envy your First Amendment. The day when America follows the example of Europe and Canada and introduces so-called “hate speech crimes” which is only used to punish people who are critical of islam, that day America will have lost its freedom.

My friends, let us hope that this never happens.

Last week, we celebrated Liberation Day in the Netherlands. We celebrated the liberation from the Nazi occupation in 1945. Many American soldiers, including many young Tennesseans, played a decisive role in the liberation of the Netherlands from nazi tyranny. We are immensely grateful for that. Young Americans gave their lives so that the Dutch might be free. I assure you: The Dutch people will never forget this.

Unfortunately, however, the Europe which your fathers and grandfathers fought and died for is not the Europe we are living in today.

I travel the world to tell people what Europe has become. I wish I could take you all on a visit to my country and show you what Europe has become. It has changed beyond recognition as a result of mass immigration. And not just any mass immigration, but mass immigration driven by the dangerous force of islam.

My friends, I am sorry. I am here today with an unpleasant message. I am here with a warning. I am here with a battle cry: “Wake up, Christians of Tennessee. Islam is at your gate.” Do not make the mistake which Europe made. Do not allow islam to gain a foothold here.

Islam is dangerous. Islam wants to establish a state on earth, ruled by islamic sharia law. Islam aims for the submission, whether by persuasion, intimidation or violence, of all non-Muslims, including Christians.

The results can be seen in Europe.

Islam is an ideology of conquest. It uses two methods to achieve this goal: the first method is the sword. Do you know what figures on the flag of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, a country where Christian churches are banned and Christians are not even allowed to wear a tiny crucifix? There is a huge sword on that flag, just below the Islamic creed. The message is clear. Without the sword islam would not have been able to spread its creed.

The second method is immigration. Islam’s founder Muhammad himself taught his followers how to conquer through immigration when they moved from Mecca to Medina. This phenomenon of conquest through immigration is called al-Hijra. My learned friend Sam Solomon has written a perfect book about it.

I had a copy of Sam’s book sent to all the members of the Dutch Parliament. But most of them are worse than Saint-Thomas in the Bible. Thomas did not believe what he had not seen. Most politicians refuse to believe the things they see before their very eyes.

In Europe we have been experiencing al-Hijra for over 30 years now. Many of our cities have changed beyond recognition. “In each one of our cities” wrote the well-known Italian author Oriana Fallaci shortly before her death in 2006, “there is a second city, a state within the state, a government within the government. A Muslim city, a city ruled by the Koran.” – end of quote.

How did the Europeans get into this situation? It is partly our own fault because we have foolishly adopted the concept of cultural relativism, which manifests itself in the ideology of multiculturalism.

Cultural relativism advocates that all cultures are equal. However, cultures wither away and die if people no longer believe that its values are better than those of another culture.

Islam is spreading like wildfire wherever people lack the guts to say that their values are better than the Islamic values.

Islam is spreading like wildfire because the Koran explicitly tells Muslims that they are “the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind” and that non-Muslims are “the worst of creatures.”

Islam is spreading like wildfire everywhere in the West where political, academic, cultural and media elites lack the guts to proudly proclaim, as I believe we all should proclaim:

Our Judeo-Christian Western culture is far better and far superior to the islamic culture. We must be proud to say so!

Multiculturalism is a disaster. Almost everyone acknowledges this today, but few dare say why. Let me tell you why: Multiculturalism made us tolerate the intolerant, and now intolerance is annihilating tolerance.

We should, in the name of tolerance, claim the right not to tolerate the intolerant. Let us no longer be afraid and politically correct, let us be brave and bold. Let us tell the truth about islam.

Before I continue I want to make clear that I do not have a problem with people. I always make a distinction between the people and the ideology, between Muslims and islam.

Indeed, I have no problems with Muslims, but I do have a problem with the totalitarian Islamic ideology of hate and violence. The fact that there are many so-called moderate Muslims, does not imply that there exists a moderate islam. A moderate islam doen not exist and will never exist.

And because there is no such thing as a moderate islam, the islamization of our free Western societies is an enormous danger.

Only two weeks ago, the British press revealed how the so-called “London Taliban” is threatening to kill women who do not wear veils in the London borough of Tower Hamlets.

In some neighbourhoods Islamic regulations are already being enforced, also on non-Muslims. Women’s rights are being trampled. We are confronted with headscarves and burqa’s, polygamy, female genital mutilation, honor-killings where men murder their wives, daughters or sisters because they do not behave in accordance with Islamic rules.

Polls show that the influence of those Muslims who live according to islam’s aggressive requirements is growing, especially among young people.

Among 15-year-old German Muslims, 40 percent consider islam more important than democracy.

Among Muslim university students in Britain, 40 percent support sharia. One in three of those students considers it legitimate to kill in the name of islam.

Christians are asked to follow the example of Jesus. Muslims are ordered to follow the example of Muhammad. That is why islam is dangerous. While Christianity preaches love, islam preached hatred and practizes violence. Hatred and violence for everyone who is not a Muslim.

Muhammad personally participated in the ethnic cleansing of Medina, where half the population once was Jewish. Muhammad helped to chop off their heads. On his deathbed, he ordered his followers to cleanse Arabia of all Jews and Christians.

To this very day, Christian symbols are prohibited in Saudi-Arabia. If you wear a cross in Saudi Arabia, they sent you to jail.

And now, Europe is beginning to look like Arabia.

Just today, a poll revealed that in Brussels, the capital of the European Union, half the islamic youths are anti-semitic. It is dangerous for Jews to walk the streets in Brussels.

If you wear a cross or a kippah in certain urban areas in Europe today, you risk being beaten up. In the capital of my own country, Amsterdam, a tram driver was forced to remove his crucifix from sight, while his Muslim colleagues are allowed to wear the veil.

In June 2008, the Christian church authorities in the Danish town of Arhus decided to pay so-called “protection money” to islamic so-called “security guards” who assure that church goers are not harassed by islamic youths.

On March 31^st, 2010, Muslims entered the Roman Catholic cathedral of Cordoba, Spain, and attacked the guards with knives. They claimed the cathedral was theirs.

Last month, the bishops of Sweden sent out a letter to priests advising them to avoid converting asylum seekers from islamic countries to Christianity, because the converts would risk losing their lives.

In the Netherlands, the city authorities in Amsterdam register polygamous marriages. The authorities in Rotterdam serve only halal meals in municipal cafeterias. Theaters provide separate seats for women who are not allowed to sit next to men. Municipal swimming pools have separate swimming hours for men and women, Muslim lawyers do not have to stand when the judges enter court rooms.

Meanwhile Jews are no longer safe on our streets. In Amsterdam, the city of Anne Frank, Jews are again being harassed in the streets. Even political leaders acknowledged that life has become unsafe for Jews in Holland. Do you know what they said? They advised Jews to emigrate. Jews are already running for Israel. But I say: Jews must not leave, violent Muslims must leave!

What is needed, my friends, is a spirit of resistance.

I repeat: What we need is a spirit of resistance.

Why? Because resistance to evil is our moral duty. This resistance begins with expressing our solidarity to Christians, Jews, indeed, to all people worldwide, who are the victims of islam. There are millions of them.

We can see what islam has in store for us if we watch the fate of the Christians in the islamic world, such as the Copts in Egypt, the Maronites in Lebanon, the Assyrians in Iraq, and Christians elsewhere.

Almost every day, churches are arsoned and Christians are assassinated in islamic countries.

In a report on the persecution of Christians in the world, Archbishop Twal of Jerusalem, wrote recently– I quote: “In the Middle East to be Christian means accepting that you must make a great sacrifice. All too often and in many places, Christians suffer various threats. On some occasions, their homes and churches are burnt, and people are killed. How many atrocities must we endure before somebody somewhere comes to our aid?” – end of quote.

Indeed, how many atrocities before we come to their aid?

Rivers of tears are flowing from the Middle East, where there is only one safe haven for Christians. You know where that is. The only place in the Middle East where Christians are safe is Israel.

That is why Israel deserves our support. Israel is a safe haven for everyone, whatever their belief and opinions. Israel is a beacon of light in a region of total darkness. Israel is fighting our fight.

The jihad against Israel is a jihad against all of us. If Israel falls, we, too, will feel the consequences. If Jerusalem falls, Athens, Rome, Amsterdam and Nashville will fall. Therefore, we all are Israel. We should always support Israel!

Today, we are confronted with political unrest in the Arab countries. The Arab peoples long for freedom. However, the ideology and culture of islam is so deeply entrenched in these countries that real freedom is simply impossible as long as islam remains dominant.

A recent poll in post-revolution Egypt found that 85 percent of Egyptians are convinced that islam’s influence on politics is good, 82 percent believe that adulterers should be stoned, 84 percent want the death penalty for apostates. The press refers to the events in the Arab world today as the Arab spring. I call it the Arab winter.

Islam and freedom, islam and democracy are not compatible.

The death of Osama bin Laden last week was a victory for the free world, but we will be confronted with Islamic terrorism as long as islam exists, because islam’s founder Muhammad himself was a terrorist, worse than Bin Laden.

And here is another truth: The rise of islam means the rise of sharia law in our judicial systems. In Europe we already have sharia wills, sharia schools, sharia banks. Britain even has sharia courts.

In my own country, the Netherlands, sharia is being applied by the courts in cases relating to divorce, child custody, inheritance, and property ownership. Women are always the victims of this because sharia discriminates women.

This is a disgrace. This is not the way we should treat women.

My friends, I told you that we have just remembered Liberation Day to commemorate the young Americans and all the heroes who offered their lives to free the Netherlands from nazi tyranny. It would be an insult to them if we Europeans would give up that precious freedom for another totalitarian ideology called Islam.

That is the goal for which my party and I work day after day. And we are having success.

In the Netherlands, we are successfully starting to roll back islam. The current Dutch government is a minority government which can only survive with the backing of my party, the Party for Freedom.

We have 24 seats of the 150 seats in parliament and we support the government, in return for measures to prohibit certain aspects of sharia law.

We have achieved that the Netherlands will soon ban the burka and the niqaab.

We will also restrict immigration from non-Western countries by up to 50% in the next four years. We are not going to allow islam to steal our country from us. It was the land of our fathers, it is our land now, our values are based on Christianity, Judaism and Humanism and we will pass this on to our children with all the freedoms that the previous generations have fought for.

Let those who want to rob us from our freedoms, stay in their own countries. We do not need them. If you want to wear a burqa, stay in Saudi-Arabia. If you want four wives, stay in Iran. If you want to live in a country where the islamic ideology is dominant, stay in Pakistan, if you don’t want to assimilate in our society, stay in Somalia. But don’t come over here.

We are also going to strip criminals who have a double nationality – for instance Dutch and Moroccan, and who repeatedly commit serious crimes, of their Dutch nationality. We will send them packing, back to their homeland.

My friends, what the Party for Freedom has achieved, shows that it can be done. We can fight the islamization of our societies.

Dear friends, here is my warning. Make no mistake: Islam is also coming for America. In fact, it is already here. America is facing a stealth jihad, the islamic attempt to introduce sharia law bit by bit. Last March, a judge in Tampa, Florida, ruled that a lawsuit against a mosque and involving the control of 2.4 million dollars, should proceed under Islamic law.

My friends, be aware that this is only the beginning. This is also how it started in Europe. If things continue like this, you will soon have the same problems as we are currently facing.

Leaders who talk about immigration without mentioning islam are blind. They ignore the most important problem Europe and America are facing. I have a message for them: it’s islam stupid!

My friends, fortunately, not all politicians are irresponsible. Here, in Tennessee, brave politicians want to pass legislation which gives the state the power to declare organisations as terrorist groups and allowing material supporters of terrorism to be prosecuted. I applaud them for that. They are true heroes.

Yesterday and today, I met some of those brave legislators. They told me that Tennessee in particular is a target of islam. Help them win their battle.

They need your support.

While Tennessee is in the frontline, similar legislative initiatives are also being taken in the states of Oklahoma, Wyoming, South Carolina, Texas, Florida, Missouri, Arizona, Indiana. It is encouraging to see that so many politicians are willing to resist islam.

This gives us hope and courage. I am not a pessimist. We can still turn the tide – even in Europe – if we act today.

There are five things which we must do.

First, we must defend freedom of speech.

Freedom is the source of human creativity and development. People and nations wither away without the freedom to question what is presented to them as the truth.

Without freedom of speech we risk becoming slaves. Frederick Douglass, the 19^th century black American politician, the son of a slave, said – I quote – “To suppress free speech is a double wrong. It violates the rights of the hearer as well as those of the speaker.”

I have already told you about my court case. This legal charade will not, however, prevent me from saying the truth. Never. I will speak out, even if they drag me before 500 courts and threaten to jail me for a thousand years.

The fact that we are being treated as criminals for telling the truth must not deter us. We are doomed if we remain silent or let ourselves be silenced. Let us not forget, this is our first and most important obligation: defend the right to speak the truth.

Second, we must end cultural relativism and political correctness. We must repeat it over and over again, especially to our children: Our Western culture based on Christianity and Judaism is superior to the islamic culture. Our laws are superior to sharia. Our judeo-christian values are better than islam’s totalitarian rules.

And because they are superior and better, we must defend them. We must fight for our own identity, or else we will lose it. We need to be warriors for the good, because the good is worth fighting for. Neutrality in the face of evil is evil.

Third, we must stop the islamization of our countries. More islam means less freedom. There is enough islam in the West already. We must stop immigration from non-Western countries, which are mostly islamic countries. We must expel criminal immigrants. We must forbid the construction of new hate palaces called mosques.

We must also close down all islamic schools because educating children in a spirit of hate is one of the worst things imaginable. We must introduce anti-sharia legislation everywhere in the free world. Enough is enough.

Fourth, we must take pride in our nations again. We must cherish and preserve the culture and identity of our country. Preserving our own culture and identity is the best antidote against islamization.

And fifth, last but certainly not least, we must elect wise and courageous leaders who are brave enough to address the problems which are facing us, including the threat of islam.

Politicians who have the courage to speak the truth about islam.

Politicians who dare to denounce the devastating results of the multicultural society.

Politicians who – without political correctness – say: enough is enough.

You and I, Americans and Europeans, we belong to a common Western culture. We share the ideas and ideals of our common Judeo-Christian heritage. In order to pass this heritage on to our children and grandchildren, we must stand together, side by side, in our struggle against Islamic barbarism.

That, my friends, is why I am here. I am here to forge an alliance. Our international freedom alliance. We must stand together for the Judeo-Christian West.

We will not allow islam to overrun Israel and Europe, the cradle of the judeo-Christian civilization.

My friends, we will stand together.

We will stand firm.

We will not submit. Never. Not in Israel, not in Europe, not in America. Nowhere.

We will survive.

We will stop islam.

We will defend our freedoms.

We will remain free.

Thank you.

Must-Read-Book: The Martyr’s Prize: Inspired by True Events

The Martyr’s Prize: Inspired by True Events

Citizen Warrior

I DON’T USUALLY read fiction, but someone I respect recommended The Martyr’s Prize to me, and I just finished it. I liked it a lot. And oddly enough, I felt that the book brought to life the reality of our situation better than dry factual data has ever done.

One “scene” in the story especially affected me; a conversation between a Saudi prince and a young mujahadeen. Their conversation actually kept me awake late into the night, thinking about it.
The mujahadeen only knew about and understood the “hard jihad.” But the prince sat him down and laid out the full picture — the carrot and stick of Islamization. On the one side, “life must be made impossible” for the non-Muslims, and they must be in constant fear of their lives; and on the other side, give them a path to peace — submitting to the rule of Islam.

The invasion must be simultaneous on all fronts, explains the prince. Speak publicly of peace, but attack anyone who even implies you have “unsavory associations.” Buy friends at the newspapers. Use the courts to harass. Make trouble for criticizers.

“At that moment something clicked,” and the young mujahadeen “suddenly understood the brilliance of the plan. A jihad that could never be defeated because it would be all encompassing; everywhere at once. No focal point to attack with Western military might. Immune, because the West would never engage in genocide; would never outlaw a religion; would never take the steps necessary to defeat such an ideology…”

This conversation occurs near the end of the book, and the reader is ready to fully understand it by then.

The book starts out with an interesting and provocative premise: Two supervisors at a university IT department find an online video giving instructions in Arabic showing step by step exactly how to make a bomb. It was a tutorial. They trace it and discover to their dismay the video was posted by someone at their university! And in the comments on the video, it said, “Brothers. I have posted this vid in the hopes that someone can translate it into English. Holy Jihad will not wait and we need to prepare. The materials are available and waiting as we speak.”

These two supervisors were not counterjihadists. They didn’t know anything about Islam or jihad. But the idea of someone showing Americans how to build bombs within the country to kill Americans really got under their skin. The more they thought about it, the more they felt motivated to do something about it. But what?

They eventually come up with the idea of making a video just like it, except for one small change: To alter the instructions so the bomb detonates while the bomb maker is constructing it!

I marked a huge number of passages in the book that I wanted to share, but now I don’t want to give them away and spoil the story for you. I would like to quote this little bit, however, to give you an idea of how the author weaves good, valid information into the narrative:

While the bomb tutorial had undeniably been the initial spark, the true turning point was the sniper video. Like a wormhole, it had sucked them in, transporting Jason and himself to another world. Within the week, an embedded link in an online article about a beating in Paris had led to another web site, this one tracking jihadist activity worldwide. He’d been amazed by the sheer number of attacks occurring on a daily basis. For that week alone there’d been thirty-six in various countries, with a body count of 221. For the month, 185 with 943 dead and 1,223 critically injured. The total since 9/11 had crested 14,000 in mid 2009. What would that be? — roughly? 71,000 dead and 92,000 seriously wounded? Digging deeper, it occurred to them that all over the world people were being killed in staggering numbers. And the West just couldn’t come to grips with it. The fact that The Religion of Perpetual Outrage claimed religious and minority status gave them immunity, at least as far as the major media and various governmental bodies were concerned.

According to the reports, Islam was misunderstood. Islamic scholars themselves clearly couldn’t articulate the actual peaceful words of the Prophet. The passages that exhorted coexistence with others — on a permanent basis — were assumed by all to be there, but the subject always seemed to get switched at the last moment, just as the question was about to be raised…

You can read The Martyr’s Prize for your own enjoyment. But I think we can also use it to help us educate our fellow non-Muslims. Reading it is like watching a good action movie; it grips your attention and won’t let go.

Some people don’t read much nonfiction, but they’ll read a good story, and this is fast-paced with a contemporary storyline and plot-propelling dialog — but it also delivers a motherload of information, and makes many good points. It may be a way to help educate a certain kind of people.

Read it yourself first, and then see who in your life might be interested in reading a story like this, and talk it up to those people. Loan your copy to them. It could help people really come to grips with what jihad is really about and what we’re up against.

In the preface, the author, Brooks William Kelley writes: “The concept of this book was a simple one really — to take stories ignored by the Western media and weave them together to form the plot of this book…”

He says, “In my writing, I’ve made it a point to use actual incidents as a basis for the story. Specifically, the ‘workplace accidents’ of 2008 and 2009 were instrumental in inspiring one of the main storylines of the book. For those who wonder whether such events in fact occurred, simply pick one and Google it.”

Kelley has done something really good here: He has given us a new way to reach people, and a way for all of us to more fully come to terms with our situation as non-Muslims.

Islam’s Apartheid

by

Amil Imani

Contributing Editor

The dictionary defines apartheid as: An official policy of racial segregation promulgated in the Republic of South Africa with a view to promoting and maintaining white ascendancy.

In 1973, the General Assembly of the United Nations opened for signature and ratification the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid (ICSPCA). It defined the crime of apartheid as:

“Inhuman acts committed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial [religious] group of persons over any other racial [religious] group of persons and systematically oppressing them.”[Italics are mine]

The declaration prohibits,

“Acts such as murder, infringement on freedom or dignity, arbitrary arrest and imprisonment, imposition of inhumane living conditions, forced labor, or enacting measures calculated to prevent a racial [religious] group from ‘participation in the political, social, economic and cultural life of the country’ such as denying them ‘basic human rights and freedoms, including the right to work, the right to form recognized trade unions, the right to education, the right to leave and to return to their country, the right to a nationality, the right to freedom of movement and residence, the right to freedom of opinion and expression, and the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.’”

Islamic member countries of the time, such as Egypt, Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia are signatories to the above declaration condemning the barbaric practices of apartheid. Yet, these same countries, as well as other Islamic nations, are the most blatant violators of the declaration.

It is the discriminatory Islamic teachings that condone and even promote wanton practices in violation of the United Nations declaration. Islam is a primitive barbaric ideology for the benefit of the male believer.

Islam, by fiat, discriminates against women. Qur’an 4:11

“Allah directs you in regard of your Children’s (inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females…. These are settled portions ordained by Allah.”

There are many many more “directives” that for all intents and purposes make women chattel of men. Here are some of the shameful rules and practices of Islamic misogyny.

Tabari IX:113 “Allah permits you to shut them in separate rooms and to beat them, but not severely. If they abstain, they have the right to food and clothing. Treat women well for they are like domestic animals and they possess nothing themselves. Allah has made the enjoyment of their bodies lawful in his Qur’an.”

Tabari I:280 “Allah said, ‘It is My obligation to make Eve bleed once every month as she made this tree bleed. I must also make Eve stupid, although I created her intelligent.’ Because Allah afflicted Eve, all of the women of this world menstruate and are stupid.”

In this case Allah is half right. Women do menstruate. But He is also wrong. Extensive studies by impartial psychologists provide unequivocal documentation of the fact that women are equal in intelligence to men.

But don’t contradict Allah and his beloved unerring mouthpiece, Muhammad. Sadly enough, even many Muslim women prefer to be treated like “domestic animals” who “possess nothing themselves,” and are “stupid.”

Thus, life goes on for the Muslim women with all the trappings of the Islamic misogyny. Here are some rules that keep women in their Muhammad-stipulated place.

·         If a Muslim woman is murdered, her beneficiary is entitled to one-half dyyeh—blood money, or compensation—as that of a murdered Muslim male.

·         A woman’s testimony in the court of law is worth one-half that of a man.

·         A woman must provide four witnesses to substantiate her claim of being raped.

·         A man can divorce his wife by simply saying to her, “I divorce you,” three times.

·         A divorced woman is entitled to a miserly compensation and automatically forfeits her rights to her children.

·         Women are barred from the lucrative and powerful cast of clergy.

·         Husbands are entitled to punish their wives corporally.

·         Men are allowed to have four wives at any one time and as many concubines as they desire and can afford.

·         Saudi Arabia, the custodian of “true Islam” imposes a raft of restrictions on women such as: women are not allowed to drive; they are not permitted to leave the country without accompaniment or explicit permission of their male kin; they are barred from most government jobs and much much more.

·         Among other Muslims, such as the Taliban and the Pashtune of Afghanistan-Pakistan region, women are barred from education and not even allowed to leave the house unless accompanied by a male kin.

·         Since education, particularly professional education, is often denied to women in many Islamic societies, there is scarcity of women physicians and male doctors are often forbidden to treat women patients.

Such is the plight of women under Islam. There is hardly the need to provide an exhaustive list of Islamic misogyny to qualify it as a shameful, discriminatory and oppressive religious apartheid.

Will Muslim women ever break out of their bondage and claim their rightful place among emancipated non-Muslim women? It is the long sub-humanized Muslim women who must discard Islam and claim their equal human rights. Muslim men will resort to every means to maintain their privileged position and their cruel dominance over women, citing the Quran as justification. Any document that consigns one half of the human race to second class status is null and void.

Its constitutional sub-humanization of women aside, Islam has a raft of beliefs and practices that violate fundamental human rights of non-Muslims in general. A few cases should suffice to fully substantiate the contention that Islam is religious apartheid. And there is no need to draw cases from the repugnant “extremist” Islamic groups such as the Taliban to make the case. Even the most “mainstream” and “peaceful” Islam is guilty of systemic apartheid. Just a couple of examples should suffice for now.

·         On December 16, 2006, Egypt’s Highest Administrative Court decreed that in order to receive an Identity Card, only Islam, Judaism, or Christianity must be entered on the application. No one of any other religion or no religion at all is permitted to list his belief or even leave it blank. Without the identity card, just about all the rights of citizenship are denied to minorities such as Baha’is, Hindus, and Buddhists. People are forced to choose between falsely claiming an approved religion and depriving themselves of just about all rights of citizenship such as jobs, education and medical care.

·         In the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Islamic law denies dyyeh to any and all people who are not Muslims or members of the only other three recognized religions. Every one of the 500,000 members of the Baha’i Faith can be murdered without the family receiving justice or compensation. As a matter of fact, the Islamic government itself has executed Baha’is for the sole “crime” of being Baha’is and has demanded that the innocently murdered person’s family reimburse it for the bullets they used to execute him.

·         The Islamic Republic of Iran’s President’s repeated threat to wipe out Israel from the map is ignored by some as an empty rhetoric of an unhinged fanatic. Yet, Ahmadinejad’s threats are far from the baseless saber-rattling of a zealot. Ahamadinejad’s government has recently ordered the comprehensive gathering of data regarding the Baha’is and all their activities. This order is deeply troubling, since it is almost a replica of what another fascist, Hitler, did before launching the genocide of six million Jews and some four million other “undesirables”. Ahamadinejad is an Islamofascist whose aim is to have a practice run on the Iranian Baha’is before embarking on destroying the Jews and other “undesirables,” following in the footsteps of the German fuehrer.

Islamic societies shamelessly practice all the sanctioned injustices listed in the U.N. charter on apartheid (see paragraphs 2 and 3, above). Islam is religious apartheid. And apartheid, by universal agreement, is an inhumane, unjust and condemned practice.

Islam cruelly practices its oppressive dogma on minorities in its lands; it is in clear violation of the provisions of Universal Human Rights. Ominously, Islam is encroaching in the traditionally non-Islamic parts of the world and doing all it can to impose its horrid doctrine on others.

It is for this present and imminent danger that the free people of the world must rise and do all they can to preserve their birthright of liberty. Muslims in the non-Islamic lands may seem harmless, and many of them indeed are harmless. Yet, Islam compels its leaders to uphold and promote its tenets at any and all costs to anyone. It is for this reason that on the one hand the Islamic governments sign the U.N. Charter that condemns apartheid, and on the other hand, these governments violate every provision of it when they are in power.

Islamofascism, the enemy of liberty, is inside the gate. It is the duty of every free human to defend freedom by defeating the enemy.

FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Amil Imani is an Iranian-born American citizen and a pro-democracy activist residing in the United States of America. Imani is a columnist, literary translator, novelist and essayist who has been writing and speaking out for the struggling people of his native land, Iran. He maintains a website at www.amilimani.com. Amil Imani is the author of the smashing book Obama Meets Ahmadinejad.

Geert Wilders in Ottawa

Thank you to Vlad Tepes for recording this speech.

Amil Imani: Islam is Misunderstood

 

Everybody just relax. Islam is badly misunderstood. The negative stereotype of Islam is the usual evil-doings of Zionists in America and their foolish fellow travelers, fundamentalist Christians. Please don’t listen to what these hatemongers say about Islam and hear us out. So implies the nationally-launched campaign of Muslim organizations in the United States.

Ads are popping up in newspapers and magazines proclaiming the magnificence of Islam and aiming to refute the “false allegations” of Islam’s ill-wishers.

Huge billboards are festooning major highways, such as the one along Highway 101 and Tully Road in San Jose, California, with crafty messages. Bold letters on the billboard proclaim: Islam You Deserve to Know. A toll-free number, 1-877-WhyIslam and website, WhyIslam.org beckon the public to get the real scoop about the religion of peace.

The billboard sneakily reminds the viewers about their kinship with Muslims. “Islam: The message of Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Mohammad.”

Well folks—Christians and Jews—the overwhelming majority of the people in the United States, you need to relax about Islam. Muslims are family. They are your kindred through your shared progenitor, Abraham.

Having Abraham as an ancestor would demand that the “children” be loving siblings. That’s the message the American Muslims try to convey. And that’s the way they aim to keep us in the deadly slumber of complacency and the delusion of multiculturalism.

For one, multiculturalism and multi-religionism are not interchangeable and are not one and the same. Muslims and their frequently well-paid apologists use the multiculturalism umbrella only in non-Islamic lands to shield themselves from the torrent of legitimate criticisms that those who know Islam better shower on this cult of violence peddled as the religion of peace.

Don’t listen to me and don’t listen to these conniving dissimulators. Find out for yourself. See if the euphemism of multiculturalism is ever even mentioned by any Islamic leader, ever printed in the Islamic press, or ever appears in any form anywhere in Muslim countries. This multiculturalism gambit is Islam manufactured wool to pull over the eyes of the non-Muslims while the Muslims carry on with their unrelenting campaign of eradicating anything or anyone non-Islamic anywhere in the world.

Those of us, through reason and tremendous act of will, who have freed ourselves from the enslaving yoke of Islam placed around our necks from birth, know about all the heinous inside dirt of this plague of humanity. We hardly need to call a toll-free number to hear a phony canned message of deceptions and lies.

We have experienced Islam first-hand and up close from the inside. We have studied the Quran, the Hadith, and the Sunna. We have seen Islam in action where it wields sway. Some of us even tried desperately to cling to this security blanket that was wrapped around us from birth. Yet, the more we studied and the more we experienced Islam, the more our effort to remain in the fold became untenable.

We broke away from Islamic slavery and found it to be our solemn duty to expose this fraud of a religion, help other Muslims to free themselves from it, and warn the good-hearted and gullible non-Muslims against falling prey to it.

The Muslim organizations in America, generously financed by the oil-rich Muslim government and sheikhs, are directed to sell Islam Lite for long enough until the cult runs deep roots and the Real Islam is introduced. One can see how the scheme played out in Europe. Much of Europe is already past the stage of Islam Lite and knee deep into the quagmire of Real Islam. And that’s exactly where things are headed in America.

For a starter, remember the Somali Muslim cabbies of the Minneapolis airport and their refusal of blind fares with seeing-eye dogs, because dogs are unclean according to their belief? The same cabbies that had a virtual monopoly at the airport also rejected passengers who had alcoholic beverages in their possession. And the recent campaign of Muslims in New York to force the city to officially recognize Islamic holidays. These chosen people of Allah have more holidays than working days. No wonder they are among the most backward and unproductive in the world.

These “annoyances” aside, one has to be more than daft not to see for himself and not be sickened by the horrors Muslims in power and Muslim governments commit, wherever they reign in the world. Their barbaric acts are not isolated behaviors of some deranged individuals that one can find within any group. They are, in fact, mandated by the authoritative teachings of Islam and those who practice them proudly proclaim their actions as an implementation of Islamic teachings.

And they are correct in this claim. Let’s just see a sampling of the Islamic teachings that mandate the beastly treatment of women, human slaves, and all non-Muslims, including those that the Islamic Softsell in the West aims to bunch itself with as kin—Jews and Christians.

[Quran 4.34] Men have authority over women because Allah has made the one superior to the others and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because Allah has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them. Then if they obey you take no further action against them. Allah is high, supreme.

[Q uran16.75] Allah sets forth a parable: (consider) a slave, the property of another, (who) has no power over anything, and one whom We have granted from ourselves a goodly sustenance so he spends from it secretly and openly; are the two alike? (All) praise is due to Allah!

[Quran 5:51] O you who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: they are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guides not a people unjust.

You may say that you know Muslims and you find them to be decent people, family people, hard-working people who are no different than any other group of people. However, these people are the Bad Muslims. Why so? Because they do not live the life the Quran commands them to lead. It is the Good Muslims that you don’t ever want to meet. These are the diehard jihadists, the terrible killers who spare no torture on infidels before decapitating them or hanging them while intoning Allah’s praise. These are the ones that don’t show the slightest mercy to their very own people who fail to toe the line.

These Real Muslims viciously and repeatedly rape women, and even men, arrested without even arrest warrants. One “lucky” victim who managed to escape the claws of these evils is Maryam Sabri arrested on phony charges and repeatedly raped in Iran’s Evin prison.

Acts of horrors committed in Islamic lands aside, it is disturbing to see Muslims dissimulate, sweet-talk and use any and all means in free non-Islamic societies to convert people to their cult. Yet, if a Muslim, on his own free will decides to leave Islam he is condemned as apostate and automatically sentenced to death. And right here in America the suffocating tentacles of Islamic bigotry are beginning to reach out to people. Just the other day, for instance, a teen-age girl had to run away from her Muslim family fearing being killed by her own father for having become Christian.

This Islamic Softsell is a replay of Muhammad’s own life example. He was peaceful and humble in Mecca among his powerful detractors. Once in Medina and with power, Muhammad slaughtered the Jews of Medina as easily as if they were sheep, plundered their belongings, and took the “sellable” women and children as slaves.

It is said that truthfulness is the foundation of all virtues. Islam not only condones, it encourages, lying and dissimulation—Taqqyeh—in dealing with non-Muslims. Hence the ads, the billboards and the claims of these liars are little more than packs of crafty propaganda.

No, there is no misunderstanding. No, it is not the Zionists and fundamentalist Christians who are misrepresenting Islam. It is Muslims and Muslim organizations who are guilty of dissimulation and fraud. Muslims act meekly when they lack sufficient power. Once in power, the Real Islam emerges from its shell of dissimulation and puts free people and their way of life to the sword.

FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Amil Imani is an Iranian-born American citizen and a pro-democracy activist residing in the United States of America. Imani is a columnist, literary translator, novelist and essayist who has been writing and speaking out for the struggling people of his native land, Iran. He maintains a website at www.amilimani.com. Amil Imani is the author of the smashing book Obama Meets Ahmadinejad.

Islam in Europa – Eurabia Rising

Es ist 2 vor 12!!!

Für unsere Sozialisten, grün-linke Politiker, so genannte Menschenrechts-Kämpfer, für unsere liberalen Journalisten und Juristen, unsere toleranten Kirchenvertreter, all den  Asylanten-NGOs , für all die Zuwandererlobbyisten in der Wirtschaft und Politik, alle Mutlikulti-Träumer, ……..
folgenden Film widmen wir Euch:

Sie, liebe Leser, verbreiten diese Bilder weiter und weiter –
unser Widerstand hat erst zu rollen begonnen,
aber er nimmt an Fahrt zu……..!

Mit großem Dank an unseren Patrioten!

A Month in the Life of Islam in Europe

courtesy Hudson NY

by Soeren Kern
May 5, 2011 at 5:00 am

The controversial Egyptian Islamic scholar Yusuf al-Qaradawi is moving to Norway to help Muslims in the polar regions of the country establish their prayer times. Qaradawi, who has been banned from entering Britain and the United States for his defense of suicide attacks against Jews as “martyrdom in the name of Allah,” will work to determine the five daily Muslim prayer times, which are calculated according to the position of the sun.

In the polar regions of Norway and other parts of Scandinavia, the sun shines for twenty-four hours during the summer months and there is permanent darkness during the winter. In recent years, when the Islamic month of Ramadan has coincided with the summer season, Muslims in the northernmost parts of Europe have had to break their fast, eat their pre-dawn meal and pray the evening prayer all within the span of one hour. The Islamic Council of Norway hopes al-Qaradawi can find a solution to this problem in a country where Islam is now the largest minority religion.

Al-Qaradawi’s trip to Norway is just one of hundreds of Islam-related news items that made the headlines in Europe last month. A perusal of just a few of these headlines offers insights into how Muslim immigration is transforming the continent, and the different ways in which Europeans are responding to the rise of Islam in their midst.

In Denmark, the President of the International Free Press Society, Lars Hedegaard, was found guilty of racist hate speech for comments he made about Islam. He was ordered to pay a fine of 5,000 Danish Kroner (about $1,000). Hedegaard’s legal problems began in December 2009, when he remarked in a taped interview that there was a high incidence of child rape and domestic violence in areas dominated by Muslim culture.

Although Hedegaard has insisted that he did not intend to accuse all Muslims or even the majority of Muslims of such crimes, and although he was previously acquitted by a lower court, Denmark’s thought police refused to drop the case until he was found guilty. After the court handed down its verdict, Hedegaard said: “The real losers today are freedom of speech and Muslim women. How can we speak up for them if we risk getting a state sanctioned label of racism?”

Also in Denmark, a new poll shows that a majority (72%) of Danes believe foreigners in Denmark should “predominantly adopt local Danish customs.” The poll comes after Danish Integration Minister Søren Pind publicly rejected the idea that Denmark should be a multicultural society. At the same time, it was announced that 100 employees of the Danish Tax Authority would take a course entitled “Operational Culture and Islam” to improve tax collection in Muslim neighborhoods.

In Britain, Islamic extremists intent on imposing Islamic Sharia law in London are threatening non-Muslim women who do not wear headscarves with violence and even death. The so-called “London Taliban” are also targeting homosexuals by plastering public walls with posters stating: “Gay free zone. Verily Allah is severe in punishment.”

In one instance, an Asian woman who works in a pharmacy in east London was told to dress more modestly and wear a veil or the shop would be boycotted. When she talked to the media about the abuse she was suffering, a man later entered the pharmacy and told her: “If you keep doing these things, we are going to kill you.” The 31-year-old, who is not a practicing Muslim, has since been told to take a holiday by the pharmacy owners, and now fears she may lose her job.

Elsewhere in Britain, an electrician in West Yorkshire may lose his job for displaying a small cross on the dashboard of his van. Colin Atkinson, who has an unblemished work record, is facing a full disciplinary hearing for gross misconduct, which could result in dismissal, for attaching an 8-inch-long cross made from woven palm leaves to the dashboard shelf below his windshield. His employer fears the cross could offend Muslims.

In Sweden, the artistic director for Stockholm’s premier cultural venue, Kulturhuset, apologized for hastily cancelling a feminist performance in which women were set to dance to a score that included recitation of verses from the Koran set to music. Eric Sjöström said his decision to cancel part of a two-day performance piece, entitled “Celebration of Womanhood,” was taken out of concern for public safety. The event will now go forward in May, but without the parts that recite the Koran.

One of Sjöström’s sharpest critics, the musician and former Abba star Björn Ulvaeus, said there is now “an unofficial prohibition against blasphemy” that only applies to Islam, and that Kulturhuset had put religious sensitivities ahead of art, free speech and women’s rights.

The Church of Sweden, meanwhile, has sent out a letter to pastors in Sweden advising them to avoid christening Muslim asylum seekers who have converted to Christianity due to the risk of reprisals in the case of repatriation.

In France, the much-debated “burqa ban” entered into force on April 11. The new law prohibits the wearing of Islamic body-covering burqas and face-covering niqabs in all public spaces in France. However, French police have been warned not to arrest any women wearing Muslim veils in or around mosques.

Abu Imran, the leader of a group called Sharia4Belgium, responded to the ban by posting a message on the Internet in which he called on French First Lady Carla Bruni to convert to Islam and wear the niqab. “We are coming to say: Oh Sarkozy, enemy of Allah, dog of the Romans, son of the unbeliever, we are on our way. We are coming to take back what belongs to us, to regain our land and purify it of unbelief and of the unbelievers. We are coming with ‘There is no god but Allah.’ We are coming because we reject democracy. We do not accept democracy. We accept nothing but the tawhid of Allah. We accept nothing but: ‘There is no god but Allah.’ We accept nothing but the Sharia of Allah.”

Meanwhile, French Interior Minister Claude Guéant faces a lawsuit for saying that the growing population of Muslims in the country “poses problems.” Muslim immigrants have accused Guéant of Islamophobia for saying that “the question [of Muslim immigration] worries our citizens: there are many who think the rules of secularism are being stretched.” Muslim groups reacted to Guéant’s comments by distributing five-pointed green stars to Muslims in districts of Paris in an effort to equate themselves with the persecution suffered by the Jews in the Holocaust.

Also in France, researchers have found that use of anonymous CVs without personal information like name, address and age does not reduce discrimination in recruitment. Researchers say that people of foreign origin and those who live in underprivileged areas are less likely to be invited to an interview if their CV contains no name or address.

Elsewhere in France, a man in Strasbourg went on trial for burning and urinating on a Koran. The prosecutor asked for three months’ suspended sentence and a fine of €1,000 ($1,500) for incitement to racial and religious hatred. According to an official at the Strasbourg Mosque, “He told me ‘We are in France and we can burn a book on Winnie the Pooh, in the same way we can burn the Koran.’ He was totally coherent and he didn’t seem to realize the impact of his acts.”

At the same time, a 21-year-old Jewish man was seriously wounded in an anti-Semitic attack by two North African youths in the town of Villeurbanne, in southern France.

During a summit in Rome on April 26, French President Nicolas Sarkozy and Italian Prime Minister Berlusconi sought to ease tensions over North African immigration by calling for the reimposition of passport controls for travel within the European Union. So far this year, approximately 25,000 North African immigrations have arrived in southern Italy on overloaded fishing boats. Once inside the European Union, migrants can move freely around 25 European countries.

In Switzerland, three Hindus, who announced their intention to burn the Koran and the Bible on Bern’s Parliament Square last November, were acquitted by a Swiss court. The judge ruled that the men could not be prosecuted for simply announcing their intention to burn the religious texts. However, the three were asked to pay half of the court costs, on the grounds that they had overstepped the boundaries of personal freedom and injured the religious feelings of others.

In Germany, police arrested three alleged members of al Qaida on suspicion that they were plotting attacks in Germany. Local media reported that the three were Moroccans living in the western German state of North Rhine-Westphalia, and were caught with “large amounts of explosives.” Citing security sources, the newspaper said the suspects were targeting the Eurovision Song Contest, which will be held in Düsseldorf on May 14.

Meanwhile, the trial of eight people accused of spreading Islamist propaganda over the Internet opened in Munich on April 12. Prosecutors say the defendants used Internet forums and blogs to call for a holy war.

In response, German Education Minister Annette Schavan says she wants to promote “European Islam” by having Muslim clerics teach courses on Islam in public schools. The German government is also financing the creation of four new institutes devoted to Islamic theology. They will be located at the universities of Tübingen, Erlangen, Osnabrück, Münster and Frankfurt.

In Finland, the nationalist True Finns Party won more votes than the governing party in parliamentary elections on April 17. The party has drawn Finland’s political map with a platform of opposition to multiculturalism and Muslim immigration.

Meanwhile, the Finnish Ministry of the Interior has launched a new Internet site focused on immigration. The politically correct objective is to “give a boost to factual and serious debate and information on the issue,” and “to get away from an ‘us and them’ position as well as from preaching and guilt attitudes.” Of course, the site does not have a discussion forum.

In Belgium, the Chamber of Deputies — the lower house of parliament — approved a bill that would ban all clothing that covers or partially covers the face. It would prohibit Muslim women from wearing burqas and niqabs in all public spaces in Belgium. The bill was passed by a vote of 136-1 and two abstentions. If approved by the Senate, Belgium would become the second European country after France to put such a law into practice. Violators of the law would be subject to a fine of up to €25 ($35) and/or imprisonment for up to seven days.

Also in Belgium, the Turkish Embassy in Brussels has condemned the anti-immigrant Vlams Belang party for using posters depicting Turkish and Moroccan immigrants as sheep being kicked out of Europe. The Turkish Ambassador to Belgium said the poster was racist and “thus constitutes a crime under Belgian law.” Speaking at a conference on April 10, Vlaams Belang leader Bruno Valkeniers said that Flemish cities have begun to look like Moroccan cities, with mosques mushrooming over the region. He also proposed the establishment of an anti-immigration network bringing together other like-minded parties across Europe.

In the Nethrlands, Queen Beatrix said in a speech that “in our country we make every effort to promote tolerance.” Of course, that tolerance does not extend to Dutch lawmaker M.P. Geert Wilders, whose anti-Islam hate-speech trial resumed in Amsterdam on April 13. His trial was halted in October 2010 after it emerged that one of the judges attempted to influence an expert witness before the trial. Even though the public prosecutor says there is not enough evidence to indict Wilders, politically activist judges now insist that the trial must proceed.

Wilders is facing five charges of inciting racial and religious hatred for remarks which include equating Islam with fascism, and other remarks calling for a ban on the Koran and a tax on Muslim headscarves. Viewed more broadly, however, the Wilders trial represents a landmark case that likely will establish the limits of free speech in a country where the politically correct elite routinely seek to silence public discussion about the escalating problem of Muslim immigration.

Wilders has articulated what is at stake in this case: “I am being prosecuted for my political convictions. The freedom of speech is on the verge of collapsing. If a politician is not allowed to criticize an ideology anymore, this means that we are lost, and it will lead to the end of our freedom.”

Über das Wesen des Islam und seinen Einfluss auf seine Anhänger

Erstellt am 2. Mai 2011 von bpeinfo

Gastbeitrag von Norbert Lachner

Bad Godesberg 2010

Weil Mohammeds Botschaft sich als religiöse Offenbarung bezeichnet und daraus den Verpflichtungscharakter für ihre Anhänger bezieht, muss man den Islam unter theologischen Gesichtspunkten betrachten, einmal für sich und dann auch im Vergleich zu den Bibelinhalten. Es reicht nicht aus, den Religionsanspruch des Islam ohne Prüfung hinzunehmen und das gesamte, aus dem Islam begründete Handeln von Muslimen unter dem Vorzeichen der grundgesetzlichen Bekenntnisfreiheit unbesehen zu tolerieren. Nur durch eine Untersuchung der religiösen Lehren des Islam ist sein Einfluss auf die Muslime zu verstehen.

Mohammeds Botschaft entfaltet religiöse Lehren, deren Glaubhaftmachung erfordert, das Evangelium zu bestreiten

Atheisten wie auch viele Christen machen den Fehler, dass sie sich über den Religionsanspruch des Islam kein eigenes Urteil bilden und sich auf das Urteil der Islam-Anhänger verlassen. Aber die Muslime selbst bilden sich ja ebenso wenig ein Urteil über die religiöse Lehre Mohammeds, sie werden in aller Regel in den Islam hineingeboren und durch Erziehung und soziale Kontrolle in ihn hineingezwungen, durch religiöse Unterweisung in ihn hineinindoktriniert, und dürfen ihn zeitlebens nicht verlassen: Auf das Aufgeben des Islam steht für die Muslime theoretisch und oft auch praktisch die Todesstrafe. Daraus erklärt sich in der Hauptsache, dass der Islam heute rd. 1,3 Mrd. Anhänger zählt und somit als „Weltreligion“ gilt.

Muslime dürfen nicht über die geistigen Lehren Mohammeds nachdenken – das wird ihnen als große Sünde vorgestellt und würde ihnen Gewissensangst machen -, sie übernehmen also die ihnen vorgesetzten Lehren unbesehen ohne Verstandesprüfung. Die Führungen christlicher Kirchen haben der Einfachheit halber Jahrhunderte lang das Gleiche angestrebt. Obwohl ihnen seit der Aufklärung und Säkularisation die irdische Macht fehlt, ihre Glaubenssätze aufzuzwingen, mangelt es ihnen deshalb noch heute oft an einleuchtenden, Verstand und Gemüt befriedigenden Erklärungen ihrer Theologie. Die katholische Kirche erliegt bis heute der Versuchung zu einer Abkürzung in der Heiligung ihrer Anhänger dahingehend, dass sie die Glaubenslehren bis ins Kleinste festlegt und der Masse der Gläubigen zur Annahme auferlegt. Sie übersieht dabei, dass sie damit das Pferd vom Schwanz her aufzäumen will, indem sie meint, aus der Rechtgläubigkeit würde die rechte Praxis entstehen, also die christliche Gottes- und Nächstenliebe. Dabei ist es umgekehrt und wurde von Jesus auch so gelehrt, dass das Bemühen um Nächstenliebe am Anfang stehen muss und die Verbindung mit Gott herstellt und stärkt. Aus dieser Verbindung erwachsen erst Aufnahmebereitschaft und Verständnis für die religiöse Wahrheit sowie die Belehrung durch den Geist Gottes. Und davon hängt das Seelenheil ab, nicht von der gedankenlosen Übernahme der „richtigen“ theologischen Spitzfindigkeiten wie auch von der vorrangigen Praktizierung der jeweiligen kirchlichen Verordnungen.

Christliche Theologen und Geistliche haben zur Ergreifung ihres Berufes selbst die vorgesetzten Glaubenslehren übernommen und nutzen eigenes Nachdenken darüber zumeist in Richtung weiterer Verwässerung in Theorie und Praxis. An Gelegenheiten zur praktischen Nächstenliebe fehlt es ihnen eher als den Gläubigen, umso mehr käme es bei ihnen auf eine innige Gottesbeziehung an. Weil sie oft wenig über ihren Glauben nachdenken und inspiriert Antworten finden, mangelt es ihnen auch an der Überzeugtheit, an wahrheitsgemäßen Erklärungen und an Überzeugungskraft bei der Weitergabe ihres Glaubens. In dem Maße, wie sie ihre eigene Religion nicht selbst prüfen und nicht gut verstehen, durchschauen sie auch nicht andere religiöse Lehren und heißen sie ohne eigenes Urteil als „Weltreligionen“ gut.

Da der Islam sich als „abrahamitische“ monotheistische Religion präsentiert, müssen sich seine religiösen Inhalte an denen der biblischen Religionen messen lassen. Da zeigt sich, dass sie bereits mit dem Judentum und erst recht mit dem Christentum nicht einig gehen. Nichtreligiöse werden den Islam, insofern sie ihn als allumfassende Lebensordnung und politische Ideologie begreifen, mit den Verfassungsgrundsätzen westlicher Demokratien vergleichen und ebenfalls eine Unvereinbarkeit feststellen können. Dies kommt nicht von ungefähr, denn die westlichen Verfassungen stützen sich auf eine Reihe von christlichen Elementen und vertragen sich daher weitgehend mit dem jüdisch-christlichen Kulturerbe. Beispielsweise spiegelt sich die Gottesebenbildlichkeit des Menschen laut Bibel im hohen Stellenwert des Individuums in der Staats- und Gesellschaftsordnung sowie in der Allgemeinen Erklärung der Menschenrechte. Gleich, ob man das islamische System unter religiösem oder weltlichem Blickwinkel betrachtet, man es findet leicht im Widerspruch zu dem, was man als das Gute und Wahre ansieht.

In dem Versäumnis oder der Weigerung, die jeweiligen Glaubenslehren zu prüfen, akzeptieren insbesondere Glaubenslose, aber auch viele Christen alles als Religion, was eine Anzahl von Menschen gemeinschaftlich als subjektiven religiösen Glauben festhält und vorbringt. Religion ist aber nicht wertfrei, sondern ist wesensgemäß auf die Ethik, auf das sittlich Gute und Richtige im Erdenleben ausgerichtet, zielt außerdem sogar auf das individuelle Heil in einer unirdischen Weiterexistenz. Im Mittelpunkt von Religion steht somit die Existenz von Gut und Böse und ihre jeweilige Definition. Folglich können gemäß der religiösen Ebene den Menschen und auch den möglicherweise sonst noch unkörperlich existierenden, mit Selbstbewusstsein und freiem Willen ausgestatteten Wesen eher gute oder eher schlechte Absichten zugeschrieben werden. Somit können auch religiöse Lehren aus guten oder bösen Absichten heraus aufgestellt und verbreitet werden, und gute oder böse Ziele verfolgen und verwirklichen. In der Betrachtung von Glaubensinhalten darf die unterscheidende Prüfung nach dem Kriterium von Gut und Böse nicht unterbleiben. Eine rein formaljuristische Anerkennung jedes subjektiven religiösen Glaubenssystems genügt nicht.

Wie gesagt, akzeptieren auch Atheisten ohne eigenes Urteil den Islam als Weltreligion und treten aus Gründen der „Gerechtigkeit“ in Europa für seine Gleichbehandlung mit dem Christentum ein. Natürlich geht es ihnen nicht um Gerechtigkeit vor Gott, sondern rein irdisch um Gleichbehandlung für gleich welche Religionen, die sie ohnehin insgesamt für verkehrt, aber in der demokratischen Gesellschaft für irgendwie regelbedürftig wie andere Lebensäußerungen auch ansehen. In welchen anderen Bereichen propagieren und agieren Atheisten ohne eigenes Urteil? Sie behaupten doch, sich im Gegensatz zu den Gläubigen des Verstandes zu bedienen und halten sich viel auf ihre Rationalität zugute. Dabei können sie nicht einmal ihre eigene Existenz und das Bestehen der Welt und des Kosmos erklären. „Am Anfang war der Wasserstoff“ oder der „Urknall“ oder ähnlich lautet ihre Antwort. Aber woher kam der Wasserstoff oder wie kam es zum Urknall? Solche Grundsatzfragen der Existenz klammern sie von vorneherein aus und betrachten sich dabei als Musterbeispiele von Vernunftwesen, während sie doch offensichtlich solchen partiellen Denkblockaden unbewusst unterliegen und damit sich und anderen etwas vormachen. Sie reden über Religionen wie die Blinden von der Farbe, weil sie sich weigern, die Wahrheitskategorie in religiösen Lehren wahrzunehmen und auf ihren Wahrheitsanspruch einzugehen. Den verpflichtenden Charakter dieser Lehren für das Handeln der Gläubigen können sie deshalb ebenso wenig nachvollziehen. Zuletzt blenden sie auch die überirdische Dimension in den Glaubenssystemen aus, weil sie ihnen nichts sagt.

Hinsichtlich des Islam, um den es hier geht, muss man bei dem, was aus Hadithen und Biografie über Mohammeds Leben bekannt ist, zugeben, dass rein irdisch nicht Erklärbares, also Überirdisches im Spiel war. So erhielt der Verkünder des Islam durch Gabriel Nachricht von geheimen Anschlagsplänen seiner Gegner, und diese, die Mekkaner, mussten schließlich einsehen und zugeben, dass sie Mohammed nicht beseitigen und nicht besiegen konnten, weil eine geheimnisvolle Macht hinter ihm stand. Nur deshalb unterwarfen sich ihm schließlich die Bewohner Mekkas und nach ihnen alle übrigen Stämme der arabischen Halbinsel.

Gabriel, sagte nicht wörtlich, dass er ein Engel sei – sonst hätte er es wohl mit dem echten Erzengel Gabriel und den himmlischen Heerscharen zu tun bekommen –, aber hier wie bei vielen Aussagen im Koran umging er die unüberschreitbaren geistigen Grenzen, die ihm offenbar gesetzt waren, dadurch, dass er durch Unklarheit die erwünschte Botschaft dennoch suggerierte oder als Folgerung nahelegte, also dass er ein Engel Gottes oder dass die Auslöschung des christlichen Glaubens Allahs Wille sei.

Dass Mohammeds Führungsgeist Gabriel nicht der Erzengel gleichen Namens war, lässt schon die abgewandelte koranische Darstellung der beiden Engelserscheinungen in der Bibel vermuten, worin die Geburt von Johannes dem Täufer und von Jesus angekündigt wurden. Für diese Auffassung spricht auch, dass Gabriel Mohammed die Botschaften zwangsweise eingab, dessen Gegnern Schreckensvisionen einflößte und sie mit tödlichen Krankheiten belegte, als Mensch in Erscheinung trat und die Vernichtung der Juden in Medina anregte und einfädelte.

Bezüglich des Wahrheitsgehalts der religiösen Lehren mag sich der Mensch weigern, über sie nachzudenken, zu urteilen und zu befinden, wenn er nicht das überirdische Geschehen in Mohammeds Leben oder sogar die Existenz Gottes abstreitet. In intellektueller Unredlichkeit mag er den religiösen Anspruch des Islam ungeprüft bestätigen und den Glauben der Muslime für bare Münze nehmen. Dann mag er den Islam als wertvolle und vollgültige Religion, das heißt als Glauben an Gott und Befolgung seiner Gebote bewerten und von daher rechtfertigen, befürworten und unterstützen. Er mag sich darauf beschränken oder es als seine höchste Pflicht betrachten, sich dafür einzusetzen, dass dem Islam die verfassungsmäßige Bekenntnisfreiheit gewährleistet wird. Er glaubt damit, alles richtig gemacht und politisch korrekt gehandelt zu haben, auch wenn er das, wofür er im Hinblick auf den Islam eintreten zu müssen meint – die Bekenntnisfreiheit –, eben damit langfristig abschafft, und eines Tages von seinen Enkelkindern, weil sie unter der Scharia aufwachen, verwünscht wird.

Das Überirdische ausblenden und verleugnen, genügt also nicht. Es ausschließlich auf Gott zurückzuführen, ist jedoch ebenso falsch. Denn wenn die Existenz Gottes bejaht wird, kann man seine Lehren nicht beiseite lassen, muss also zunächst auf alle Fälle die Bibelinhalte zu Rate ziehen. Danach gibt es als geschaffene Wesen die Geister, die bei Gott blieben (Engel), und Geister, die sich gegen Gott erhoben und aus dem Himmel gestürzt wurden, das sind gefallene Engel, also Satan, Dämonen, Teufel, sowie Menschenseelen als deren Gefolgschaft. Der Islam selbst kennt den Satan als Feind Gottes und der Menschen, aber er täuscht über Satans Wirken hinweg und verharmlost es. Wenn Gott in die Überlegung einbezogen wird, dann muss auch sein Gegner und dessen Gefolge in Betracht gezogen werden. Dann ist auch die Überlegung unerlässlich, ob der Koran und das Handeln Mohammeds, worauf der Islam beruht, Gott zum Ursprung haben oder Gottes Gegner. Bei dem sittlich und geistig mangelhaften Zustand der heutigen Erdenmenschheit ist es nämlich nicht von vorneherein ausgeschlossen, dass ein religiöses Glaubenssystem, nur weil eine große Menschenmasse ihm anhängt, auch auf einer gigantischen Irreführung beruhen kann.

Wenn die Existenz Gottes und seines Gegners eingeräumt wird, sind auch der Gegensatz und die widerstreitenden Bestrebungen zu berücksichtigen, also der Kampf zwischen Gut und Böse, der sich auch in und zwischen den Menschen abspielt. Sofern man nicht die Bibel als unerheblich abtut, wie es den Muslimen gelehrt wird, sieht man aus der Erklärung des Neuen Testaments den Kreuzestod Jesu im Zentrum des Kampfes zwischen Gut und Böse. Dann wird zum Entscheidungskriterium bezüglich des Standpunkts und der Glaubwürdigkeit von Mohammeds Lehre, was letztere zu den christlichen Kernpunkten aussagt: Mohammeds Verkündigung bestreitet Jesu Kreuzestod genauso wie die Notwendigkeit einer Erlösung und die Erbsünde als deren Ursache. Der Islam bestreitet die biblische Lehre und verurteilt den Glauben daran als unvergebbare Sünde, welche die ewige Höllenstrafe nach sich zieht. Der Islam hält die Gläubigen davon ab, die Erlösung anzunehmen und das Seelenheil auf christlichem Wege zu gewinnen. Er hat deshalb nicht den biblischen Gott, sondern dessen Gegner zum Ursprung.

Vertreter christlicher Kirchen und Christen missverstehen den Islam oft als eine monotheistische Religion wie das Judentum und das Christentum, nur mit leichten Abweichungen oder Unvollkommenheiten. Die eingehende theologische Analyse erweist jedoch, dass der Islam in seinen religiösen Lehren die biblischen Lehren bestreitet und die biblischen Religionen bekämpft. Auch ohne Gottesglauben, von einem rein wissenschaftlichen Standpunkt aus und mit intellektueller Redlichkeit ausgestattet, muss sich der Mensch wegen der inhaltlichen Unvereinbarkeit der religiösen Lehren von Bibel und Koran entscheiden, welcher von beiden behaupteten Offenbarungsschriften er Glaubwürdigkeit zuerkennt und welcher nicht. Bei dieser Entscheidung über den Wahrheitsgehalt gibt es nur ein Entweder-Oder und nichts dazwischen, weil sich die jeweiligen Lehren – christliche Frohbotschaft und Verkündigung Mohammeds – gegenseitig ausschließen.

Wenn man nun den Islam einer vernunftgeleiteten kritischen Betrachtung unterzieht, zeigt sich: Er stellt ein Gottesbild, ein Sittengesetz und einen Heilsweg vor, der sich völlig von denen unterscheidet, die zuvor in der Bibel niedergelegt sind. Dabei beruht der Islam auf den zwangsweisen Eingebungen, welche ein einziger Mann von zweifelhaftem Lebenswandel während 23 Jahren erhielt. Demgegenüber besteht der Inhalt der Bibel unter anderem aus der Chronik von Ereignissen, welche über einen Zeitraum von 2000 Jahren jeweils bis zu Tausende und Zehntausende Menschen erlebten.

Der Islam behauptet, dass seine Lehre von dem einzigen wahren Schöpfergott stammt, von dem schon zuvor in der Bibel die Rede war. Dies würde bedeuten, dass dieser Gott sechshundert Jahre nach Jesus durch Mohammed eine Lehre verkünden und eine Religion gründen ließ, in welcher biblische Geschichten anders erzählt und ihres ursprünglichen Sinnes beraubt werden, in welcher eine andere Rechts- und Gemeinschaftsordnung, deren Gerechtigkeit nicht überzeugt, aufgestellt wird, in welcher eine andere Lebensordnung vorgeschrieben und ein anderer Heilsweg gewiesen werden. Das Wirken Jesu und seine heilsgeschichtliche Bedeutung im Neuen Testament wird nämlich im Islam ausgeblendet, ja sogar rückgängig gemacht, weil sich Mohammeds Botschaft als die endgültige vollkommene Religion bezeichnet, welche das Judentum und das Christentum berichtigt und aufhebt und zum angeblichen Glauben Abrahams zurückkehrt.

Ist es jedoch glaubhaft, dass Gott sein Wirken am Volk Israel und in Jesus revidiert und sich einen anderen Heilsweg überlegt hätte, oder dass er verschiedenen Völkern unterschiedliche, sogar konträre Heilswege anvertraut hätte, die dann zum gleichen Ziel führen sollten? Nein, es ist nicht glaubhaft, weil so etwas nicht mit der vollkommenen Weisheit, die man Gott zuschreiben muss, vereinbar wäre. Damit rückt die oben erwähnte Möglichkeit in Betracht, dass es sich beim Islam nicht um eine wahre Religion handelt, die von einer guten geistigen Quelle ausgeht und gute Absichten verfolgt und gute Wirkungen hervorbringt. Vielmehr begründet der Islam eine unwahre Pseudoreligion und dient den bösen Absichten und Zielen einer ungöttlichen und gottgegnerischen Quelle.

Wer immer sich veranlasst sieht, den Islam und seine Ausübung in besonderem Maß gutzuheißen, zu rechtfertigen, zu befürworten, gegen kritische Betrachtung in Schutz zu nehmen, zu unterstützen und zu fördern, muss sich also fragen lassen, welch seltsamem Gottesbild er damit das Wort redet, warum er in der religiösen Frage auf den Gebrauch seines Verstandes verzichtet und welchen Vorstellungen von Gut und Böse er anhängt. Wer immer die Botschaft Mohammeds, und das heißt: Gabriels, als Offenbarung Gottes bestätigt und ihre Umsetzung im Islam gutheißt und unterstützt, beteiligt sich an der darin bestehenden fortgesetzten Verkennung und Beleidung Gottes. Christen sollten in dieser Frage entweder schweigen oder die Wahrheit sagen, was allerdings voraussetzt, dass sie die Wahrheit erkannt haben. Wer aber, wenn nicht sie, sollte sich um die Wahrheit in Religionsfragen bemühen?

Interreligiöser „Dialüg“ und politische Mitwirkung als Mittel zur islamischen Weltherrschaft:

Einen aufrichtigen Dialog mit anderen Religionen verbietet der Islam und bezeichnet ihn als Unsinn, da er doch selbst die alleinige Wahrheit innehabe. Vielmehr geben sich die zugewanderten Muslime der machtlosen Minderheitenposition entsprechend – wie Mohammed anfangs in Mekka – anpassungs- und dialogbereit, gemäßigt und friedlich. Der bewaffnete Dschihad ist demgegenüber lediglich ein anderes Mittel zur Erreichung des allgemeinen Zieles der Weltherrschaft des Islam.

Wenn Muslime in politischen Parteien mitwirken, sich als Abgeordnete wählen lassen und ein politisches Mandat übernehmen, stellt sich noch stärker als bei der Einbürgerung die Frage nach der Verfassungstreue, die sie als Anhänger des Islam aufbringen können. Wenn Muslime sich in einer C-Partei engagieren, kommt noch die Frage nach den Unterschieden und möglichen Gemeinsamkeiten zwischen den Religionen Christentum und Islam hinzu, oder zumindest hinsichtlich der jeweiligen aus ihnen erwachsenen Leitbilder und Handlungsprinzipien. Politiker gleich welcher Parteien meinen offenbar, dass die Muslime trotz ihrer anderen Religion zum selben Menschenbild kommen wie der christlich geprägte Westen. Dem ist aber nicht so. Die Unterschiede zwischen Christentum und Islam wirken sich vor dem Hintergrund widerstreitender, unvereinbarer religiöser Lehren auf die Bereiche Menschenwürde, Gleichberechtigung der Geschlechter, Gleichheit vor dem Gesetz, Staatsidee usw. aus.

Die religiösen Lehren des Islam sind in sich unglaubhaft, abstrus, unklar, widersprüchlich, mit einem widerlegbaren Anspruch einer „abrahamitischen“ Religion und der Berichtigung der Bibel behaftet. Sie ergeben eine ungültige Theologie, verhelfen jedoch dem totalitären islamischen System durch die Maskierung als Religion zu höherer Wirksamkeit der Indoktrination und der gewalttätigen Ausbreitung sowie heute in Europa zur unberechtigten Ausnutzung des Rechts auf Bekenntnisfreiheit. Das Grundrecht auf Bekenntnisfreiheit und freie Religionsausübung fügt sich lediglich in die anderen Grundrechte ein, es rechtfertigt niemals, dass Muslime hierzulande unter dem Etikett „Religion“ deren verfassungs-, menschenrechts- und völkerrechtswidrigen Ziele unter anderem des islamischen Gottesstaates und der islamischen Weltherrschaft verfolgen. Und die unernste, liberale Glaubensauffassung der meisten, nur noch formal christlichen einheimischen Bewohner Europas kann man nicht auf die Mehrheit der muslimischen Migranten übertragen. Auch das ist eine häufige Illusion der politischen Führung. Denn die muslimische Gläubigkeit erschöpft sich nicht in privater Frömmigkeit, sondern umfasst ebenso Wunschvorstellungen von Gesellschaft und Staat, ja eine vollständige geschlossene Weltanschauung.

Wegen des Verbots des Nachdenkens über Offenbarungsinhalte können Muslime gar nicht zu einer eigenen, auf tiefem Verstehen gründenden Überzeugung von der Richtigkeit ihrer „Religion“ gelangen. Aber auch bei noch so viel Nachsinnen lässt sich Gabriels Botschaft gar nicht in eine schlüssige Lehre verwandeln, weil sie unheilbar – und sicherlich absichtlich – unklar und widersprüchlich bleibt, ja an sich nichts als ein unlösbares Rätsel ist. Umso wichtiger ist dem Muslimen die Gemeinschaft der Islam-Gläubigen (Umma), denn an der offensichtlichen Gläubigkeit der anderen richtet er sich selbst empor. Nicht umsonst kann gerade im Islam die Frömmigkeit leicht am äußeren Handeln abgelesen werden, an der Erfüllung der Gebets- und Fastenpflicht. Jeder praktiziert äußerlich, um der sozialen Kontrolle zu genügen, und zeigt sich dadurch als gläubig, und wird durch das Beispiel der anderen und die gemeinschaftliche Ausübung wiederum selbst in seinem Glauben bestärkt und gekräftigt, ohne jemals eine eigene innere Überzeugung zu gewinnen. Die Gläubigkeit bleibt sozial vermittelt.

Insbesondere in der Diaspora, als Migranten in Europa, bekämpfen Muslime ihre Unsicherheit, die aus mangelnder sozial einheitlicher religiöser Erfahrung und aus der unvermeidlichen allgegenwärtigen Wahrnehmung der Anders- und Ungläubigen erwächst, mit Bekräftigung und gegenseitigem Mutmachen, so wie Kinder im Dunkeln pfeifen, um ihre Angst zu überspielen. Allein oder gemeinschaftlich beschwören sie die baldige Übermacht über die Nichtmuslime und die schließliche Weltherrschaft des Islam, bauen sich an der ewigen Verdammnis der Anderen auf, beginnen sie zu verurteilen und zu bedrohen, trösten sich über die einstweilige Machtlosigkeit und Demütigung ihres Herrschaftsanspruchs mit der Vorstellung der baldigen Revanche hinweg. Den einheimischen Nichtmuslimen in Europa erscheint dies zwangsläufig oft als unverständlich, ja als Ausdruck eines zwanghaften Wahnsystems.

Infolge ihrer Indoktrination leben die Muslime in einer Verfassung der ständigen Projektion ihrer aus Ungewissheit befürchteten Fehlerhaftigkeit auf die „Anders-„ und „Ungläubigen“. Die im Koran häufig vorkommende Kritik an den Nichtmuslimen trifft in größtem Umfang auf die Muslime selbst zu (vgl. beispielsweise die Koranverse 2;171, 6;116, 9;67, 10;100, 26;99, 36;62, 71;27; im Internet zu finden unter „de.knowquran.org“; Vorschläge für die Stichwortsuche: rechtgeleitet/rechtleiten/leitet, irre/Irre, Verlierer/Verlierende, Ungläubige, Ungerechte, Heuchler, Frevler, (keinen) Verstand/verstandeslos, Unheil (stiften)).

Viele Kirchenvertreter ersetzen offensichtlich wirkliche Islam-Kenntnisse durch ein Idealbild von der „Bruder-Religion“, an dem sie zäh festhalten. Aus ihrem Handeln ist kein Wissen zu ersehen von der ungültigen Theologie des Islam, von seiner christentumsfeindlichen Stoßrichtung, von seinem Ziel der Weltherrschaft und seinen verschiedenen Mitteln, dieses Ziel zu erreichen, und von den verdeckten fundamental-islamischen Umtrieben vieler muslimischer Vereinigungen hierzulande. Die meisten kirchlichen Offiziellen, und von ihnen unterwiesen die Standardchristen, halten den Islam für das, was ihnen im offiziellen „Dialüg“ präsentiert wird, sie nehmen den Diaspora-Islam für den ganzen und einzig existierenden Islam und meinen somit, er sei friedlich und tolerant. Im Zuge dessen schließen sie sich bereitwillig der von Nichtmuslimen konstruierten Unterscheidung zwischen Islam und Islamismus an, einer auf Unkenntnis beruhenden oberflächlichen Erklärung des islamisch begründeten Terrorismus. Den Muslimen selbst ist diese Unterscheidung fremd und unerwünscht, da nicht islamgemäß. Sie bestätigen sie allenfalls im Zuge der Täuschung, um das Image von der Friedlichkeit des Islam zu fördern. Viele Muslime kennen aber auch ihren Glauben so wenig und praktizieren ihn auf so gewöhnliche Art, dass sie nicht wissen, dass erst der Dschihadkämpfer die Erwartungen Allahs völlig erfüllt und die Belohnung im Paradies mit hundertprozentiger Sicherheit und im Vollmaß erlangt.

Außerdem wollen die Kirchen lieber dem Islam die gleichen Rechte und Vorrechte, die sie selbst besitzen, zuschanzen, als dass sie ihnen selbst gemeinsam mit dem Islam beschnitten würden. Sie teilen gern mit dem Islam die Pfründe und Einflussgebiete, zugunsten eines oberflächlich guten Einvernehmens halten sie sich mit der Missionierung unter Muslimen zurück. Sie suchen in den Muslimen Verbündete im Kampf gegen den Sittenverfall und um die Bewahrung der Religionsprivilegien. Bei alldem glauben die Kirchenleute offenbar auch, dass das Auftreten der muslimischen Migranten in der Gesellschaft immer so bleibt wie jetzt. Weil sie ja die verschiedenen Taktiken des Islam nicht durchschauen – indem sie ihn für bloße Religion halten –, sind sie blind und taub für die Wahrscheinlichkeit, dass die unzweifelhaft wachsende Quantität der Muslime im Land irgendwann in eine konträre Qualität ihres Auftretens umschlagen dürfte. Aus einer Minderheit wird über einen einflussreichen Bevölkerungsteil eine herrschende Mehrheit. Beispiele für eine solche Vereinnahmung und Umdrehung von Ortschaften und Stadtvierteln sind in Europa und in den USA schon zur Genüge bekannt. Aber die Führungseliten in der Politik und den Kirchen unterlassen es, erkennbare Schlussfolgerungen daraus zu ziehen, und die Medienmehrheit dient sich den Führungseliten an im Bestreben, auf der Seite der Mächtigen und der voraussichtlichen Gewinner zu stehen.

Mehr noch als Christen haben Atheisten aufgrund ihres Desinteresses für die Glaubensinhalte keinen Blick dafür, dass die gesellschaftliche Entwicklung bezüglich der schlecht integrierten muslimischen Minderheit nach einer kontinuierlichen Verschärfung auch einmal schlagartig kippen kann. Allen diesen fantasielosen Abwieglern gegenüber der Islamisierungsgefahr fehlt der langfristige Blick in die Zukunft, sie denken nicht an übermorgen, nicht an die Enkelgeneration. Politiker retten sich gewöhnlich bis zur nächsten Wahl, Kirchenvertreter benehmen sich wie Politiker und vernachlässigen ihren Glauben, manche Geistliche verwässern ihre Glaubensauffassung dermaßen, dass sie eher als Sozialarbeiter und Event-Veranstalter denn als Seelsorger agieren. Christen leben fehlgeleitet, uninformiert und unkritisch dahin, und Glaubenslose sind mit Blindheit hinsichtlich religiöser und pseudoreligiöser Lehren geschlagen.

Werden die zugewanderten Muslime in Europa mit ihrer Zukunftsvision Recht behalten, werden sie in ihren Bemühungen, die Herrschaft zu erringen, Erfolg haben? Nach irdischen Maßstäben zu urteilen besteht in Anbetracht der derzeitigen Lage und Entwicklung eine gewisse Wahrscheinlichkeit dafür. Die politische Führung scheint seit langem und weiterhin unfähig oder unwillig, die Gefahr der Islamisierung Europas zu erkennen und ihr zu begegnen. Den Christen bleibt jedoch noch das Vertrauen auf die göttliche Allmacht. Auch wenn es nur noch wenige wahre, treue und eifrige Christen im Westen geben mag, deren Schutz sich Gott angelegen sein lassen dürfte, eine Weltherrschaft des Islam, welche die Christenheit weltweit blutig verfolgen und dezimieren würde, wird Gott nicht zulassen. Einem wesentlichen Schritt dahin, wie ihn die vollständige Umwandlung Europas durch eine muslimische Bevölkerungsmehrheit infolge des „Geburtendschihads“ darstellen würde, wird Gott ebenfalls einen Riegel vorschieben. Wie, das bleibt in seinem Ratschluss verborgen. Vermuten kann man jedoch bereits Einiges, sowohl irdische als auch überirdische Mittel. Biblische Beispiele könnten sich in globalem Maßstab wiederholen in der Art von 2. Mose 12;12,13 oder genauer Hesekiel 9;4-9. Gott ist noch immer allmächtig und lenkt das Geschehen und ist ein Herr auch über seinen Widersacher, aber immer entsprechend seiner Weisheit und Liebe. Nachdem aber die angestammten Europäer ihren Glauben in so großem Ausmaß vernachlässigen, können sie nicht erwarten, dass sie bei der anstehenden Reinigung der Erde vom Bösen völlig verschont bleiben und nicht schwer in Mitleidenschaft gezogen werden. Spätestens bei einem übernatürlichen Eingriff Gottes werden aber auch die Muslime merken, dass es einen Gott gibt, der eben nicht ihr Allah ist und nicht nach den Lehren Gabriels handelt.

Wer nicht dem Christentum anhängt, kann diese christlichen Zukunftserwartungen als genauso wahnhaft und irreal betrachten wie diejenigen der fundamentalistischen Muslime. Zu den Eigenheiten religiöser Lehren gehört nun einmal, dass sie Glaubenssache sind, was wiederum auf das Eingangsthema zurückweist, welche Botschaft glaubwürdiger erscheint: die der Bibel oder die des Korans. Um diese Frage kommt ein bewusst lebender und reflektierender Europäer heutzutage angesichts der schleichenden Islamisierung nicht mehr herum.

Norbert Lachner, Stralsund  02.05.2011

Fjordman: Preparing for Ragnarök

From the Baron at Gates of Vienna:

Preparing for Ragnarök

The noted blogger Fjordman is filing this report via Gates of Vienna.
For a complete Fjordman blogography, see The Fjordman Files. There is also a multi-index listing here.

Predicting the future is a difficult exercise.

The City of God was written by Augustine of Hippo soon after the city of Rome was sacked by the Visigoths in AD 410. This shocked him and his contemporaries, yet he apparently did not understand that he was watching the death of an entire civilization. Augustine himself died while the Vandals were about to sack his city.

The Scottish economist Adam Smith published his The Wealth of Nations in 1776 during the early stages of the Industrial Revolution in Britain, yet he did not see this world-historical transformation coming. Augustine and Smith were both very smart men, but even they could not foresee the near future or understand the full force of changes that was underway in their own lifetimes. Individuals who were much cleverer than I have been spectacularly wrong about the future. There is a very substantial risk that I will make the same mistake now, but I’ll try.

I have increasingly come to suspect that Western civilization is not merely under threat, but that it is in fact already dead. It probably died many years ago; we just didn’t notice at the time. The West is currently in such an advanced state of decline that a collapse of sorts can no longer be avoided. The established momentum is too great, and the ruling oligarchs are not even trying to hit the brakes. A collapse will happen. It is only a question of how we deal with this, and whether we manage to carve out a good-sized homeland for our people afterwards.

I believe that the European Union will disintegrate within the coming generation, that the USA in its present form will not survive his century and that we will be facing a full structural, political, ideological and economic crisis within the coming generation followed by serious social and ethnic strife. While the twentieth century was the bloodiest century in human history so far, I fear that the twenty-first century will eventually surpass it, if for no other reason than the world is much more populous than it was in 1914 or 1939.

As Jacques Barzun, the French-born American teacher, author and historian of ideas, puts it in From Dawn to Decadence, “How a revolution erupts from a commonplace event — tidal wave from a ripple — is cause for endless astonishment. Neither Luther in 1517 nor the men who gathered at Versailles in 1789 intended at first what they produced at last. Even less did the Russian Liberals who made the revolution of 1917 foresee what followed. All were as ignorant as everybody else of how much was about to be destroyed. Nor could they guess what feverish feelings, what strange behavior ensue when revolution, great or short-lived, is in the air.” Mr. Barzun also reminds us that “When people accept futility and the absurd as normal, the culture is decadent. The term is not a slur; it is a technical label. A decadent culture offers opportunities chiefly to the satirist.” The West today is clearly decadent.

The Russian-born author Alexander Boot was a philology graduate of Moscow University under the Communist system during the Cold War and lectured on English and American literature before getting into trouble with the KGB, the secret police of the Soviet Union. He emigrated to the West in 1973, only to discover that the West he admired and was seeking no longer existed. This inspired a life-long quest for an explanation, some of it detailed in his book How the West Was Lost. He sees Western history as a prolonged internal struggle between two different beings which he calls Modman and Westman. Saint Paul was a Greco-Roman Christian and the first Westman. Modman saw himself as close to divine; Jesus Christ, God as man, had been replaced by Modman as God, but the old God had to die first.

He believes that non-European immigrants serve as a protected class used as a battering ram by the ruling elites to systematically smash and demolish the nation-states of the white West. Laws against “racism” are therefore not meant to punish criminal acts, but rather to intimidate any opposition among Europeans by always keeping whites fearful and mentally on the defensive. “They are on the books to reassert the power of the state to control not just the citizens’ actions but, more important, their thoughts.” Boot warns that “A state capable of prosecuting one person for his thoughts is equally capable of prosecuting thousands, and will predictably do so when it has consolidated its power enough to get away with any outrage.” For this reason, the author predicts that “more and more people in Western Europe and North America will be sent to prison not for something they have done, but for something they have said.”

Alexander Boot’s basic conclusion is that the West is dead, but as a Christian man he believes in resurrection and in the possibility of a life after death. Perhaps that is not a bad summary.

According to the French writer Guillaume Faye, for the first time humanity as a whole is threatened by a cataclysmic crisis that is likely to begin in the decade before 2020 — a crisis provoked by degradation of the ecosystems and geopolitical contests for scarce resources like agricultural land, oil, and above all water; by the fragility of an international economic order based on speculation and the massive indebtedness of democratic states; by the return of epidemics; by the rise of terrorism and nuclear proliferation; by the growing aggressiveness of Islam’s world offensive; and by the dramatic ageing of European populations, whose below replacement-level birth rates are confronted with rapidly growing masses of young people in the dysfunctional countries of the global South, coupled with mass migrations to the North.

This convergence of catastrophes will mark the transition from one era to another. The USA will most likely cease to be the leading world power by mid-century, perhaps cease to exist at all in its present form. The global center of power will then move back to Eurasia, where it has almost always been previously. The strongest power will probably be China or what Faye calls “Euro-Siberia” — a federated alliance between the peoples of Europe plus Russia. He doesn’t think this is literally the end of the world, merely the end of the world as we know it. Something new may arise from these events, since Europe is a civilization of metamorphosis.

Faye predicts two possibilities for European civilization over the coming century: regeneration based on a resurgence of ancestral values, or else disappearance. Europe, especially the western half of the Continent, is currently being invaded. This is coupled with an incredible masochism on the part of Europeans themselves. Only a terrifying crisis can awaken them, and war is the most merciless of selective forces; a people that abandons its will to power inevitably perishes. A “mental AIDS,” a virus of nihilism, has severely weakened their natural defenses. Consequently, Europeans have succumbed to self-extinction. The primary symptom of this is “xenophilia,” a systematic preference for the Other over the Self.

The current advanced state of decadence owes much to the secularization of Christian charity and its modern egalitarian offshoot, human rights. In the widest possible sense it was the same civilizational genius that gave the world the concepts of universal gravitation and universal human rights. After the unprecedented successes of the Scientific Revolution, post-Enlightenment Europeans fell so much in love with the power of their own ideas that they ultimately came to define their very existence as one big idea, hence the concept of an “idea nation” or “proposition nation” was born. The leaders of this were the Americans and the French, whose Revolutions in the late 1700s came to view their countries as universal republics. This ideal was not and could not be implemented at that time, but two centuries later, coupled with the rise of global communications, it won out over ethnic identification.

Faye believes that Europe now faces a danger unparalleled in its history and refuses to see it. It has been colonized by peoples from the South. This non-European invasion began in the 1960s and was largely self-engendered, by politicians contaminated with Marxist ideas, by an employer class greedy for cheap labor, and by Utopian humanitarian ideals or misplaced post-colonial guilt. Illegal immigrants/foreign colonizers are very rarely repatriated, but receive lavish social welfare benefits handed out to them by anti-white forces in control of the state:

A race war is foreseeable now in several European countries, a subterranean war that will be far more destructive than ‘terrorism.’ The White population is being displaced, a sort of genocide is being carried out against it with the complicity or the abstention of the ruling class, the media, and the politicians, for the ideology these collaborating elites uphold is infused with a pathological hatred of their own people and a morbid passion for miscegenation. The state’s utopian plan for ‘republican integration’ has nevertheless failed because it assumed peaceful coexistence between foreigners and natives, non-Whites and Whites, was possible in a single territory. Our rulers haven’t read Aristotle, who taught that no city can possibly be democratic and orderly if it isn’t ethnically homogeneous… European societies today are devolving into an unmanageable ethnic chaos.

He believes that a rebirth of European civilization in a different form is possible, but not inevitable. Whether or not this transformation takes place depends upon to what extent Europeans manage to restore healthy societies while drawing upon their historical memory, rather than having Islamic values imposed upon them. He thinks they should adopt a policy of Europe First. Others take care of their own problems, first and foremost. Whites must learn to do the same. It is their future existence that is under threat, not that of Africans or Pakistanis:

The twenty-first century will be a century of iron and storms. It will not resemble those harmonious futures predicted up to the 1970s. It will not be the global village prophesied by Marshall MacLuhan in 1966, or Bill Gates’ planetary network, or Francis Fukuyama’s end of history: a liberal global civilization directed by a universal state. It will be a century of competing peoples and ethnic identities. And paradoxically, the victorious peoples will be those that remain faithful to, or return to, ancestral values and realities — which are biological, cultural, ethical, social, and spiritual — and that at the same time will master technoscience. The twenty-first century will be the one in which European civilization, Promethean and tragic but eminently fragile, will undergo a metamorphosis or enter its irremediable twilight.

American political scientist Samuel P. Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations thesis from the 1990s has been accused of simplification, but he should be credited with placing the significance of ethno-cultural blocs on the radar of global politics. He is also right in pointing out that this era is characterized by a West with declining influence. The tectonic plates of global power are shifting. Future historians may label this age “the retreat of the Western world order.” The West is no longer strong enough to carry the rest of the world on its shoulders. We will face generations of turmoil until a new equilibrium is found. These massive changes and the perceived weakness of a civilization that has been dominant globally for centuries could very well ignite a new world war. Multiculturalism and the inability or unwillingness of Western nations to uphold their borders from foreign infiltration is viewed by others as an invitation for attack and a signal that the West is weak and ripe for conquest.

This century may well be dominated by a resurgence of ethno-cultural blocs. Europeans need to break with the “presentism” in which they are currently sunk and learn to see themselves again (as do many others) as a “long-living people,” bearers of a great past and hopefully a great future, too. The mental revolution needed to bring about this change in European attitudes is only possible through a gigantic crisis, a violent shock, which is already on its way. The present system is founded on a belief in miracles and a myth of indefinite progress. It is bound to collapse, but we should remember that history is open-ended and presents many unexpected twists and turns. Opportunities will arise. We need to be able to grasp them.

I’ve been trying to think centuries ahead about what is needed for European survival. The bottom line is: We need our own territories again, our own countries. History has shown us, for instance in Latin America or in parts of Central Asia, that once the European genetic percentage drops below a certain threshold, the resulting population neither looks nor acts like Europeans. Experience also tells us that if two or more different populations inhabit the same land, they will eventually mix. In combination, this means that the only way European civilization can flourish in the long run is if we have large territories specifically dedicated for people who are overwhelmingly of demographic European stock. In those cases where this has been lost it needs to be reestablished. Ideas matter, but culture primarily follows genes.

All nations around the world try to maintain their ethnicity. Only in white majority Western countries do the authorities wage a deliberate demographic and cultural war against the majority population. This is evil, and Europeans have every right to defend themselves against evil policies. Whites have shown the ability to create societies and social systems that transcend the narrow confines of clan, tribe and ethnic nepotism. This is in many ways a great character trait, but it can also be our Achilles’ heel if it is weaponized and turned against us. We must recognize that we are unusual, and that our values are far from universally shared.

White Westerners have given other peoples, including actively hostile tribes, the tools needed to multiply beyond their native capacity, the transportation needed to travel to our countries, the human rights legislation needed to settle here and the welfare states needed to exploit us.

This situation is intensified by the fact that globalization of communications and transportation, ironically to a large extent created by Western inventions, puts severe pressure on our nations in ways which were unthinkable a few generations ago. When the Christian Gospels were written down at the end of the first century AD, the population of the Roman Empire was perhaps 60 million people. This is less than the annual population growth in the early twenty-first century. In other words: The global population grows by more than another Roman Empire every single year. Our system wasn’t designed to cope with such numbers.

The various cultures and religions of the world have experienced time in different ways. We are most accustomed to a linear system deriving from the Judeo-Christian tradition, which sees a clear progression from the creation of the world through a long series of events to a last time, a Day of Judgment and an end to all history. Modern science also tends to start with a universe created at a specific point in time, the “Big Bang,” although its end is yet uncertain.

As Parkes states in Gods and Men — The Origins of Western Culture, “The most significant feature of the Jewish heritage, however, was its view of history. Other ancient peoples had believed in a golden age, but had always located it in the past at the beginning of time. Israel alone looked forward to a golden age in the future and interpreted history as a meaningful and progressive movement toward this Messianic consummation. Originating in tribalistic loyalty, and reflecting the determination of a weak people to retain its identity in spite of conquest and enslavement, the Messianic hope was given universal scope by the prophets and became the end toward which all earthly events were moving. In various manifestations, religious and secular, spiritual and materialistic, it became one of those dynamic social myths which give meaning and direction to human life and which have more influence on human action than any rational philosophy. Unless its importance is understood, the development not merely of the Jewish people but also of the whole Western world becomes unintelligible.”

Ragnarök (“Doom of the Gods” or “Judgment of the Powers”), the end of the world as we know it, will mean the death of the main god Odin and his son Thor. This is described in the Icelandic Völuspá (“Prophecy of the Seeress [Völva]”), the first poem of the Poetic Edda and one of our most important sources to Norse mythology, although it was written down in the Christian era. Odin will meet his end against the giant wolf Fenrir. Thor will fight against Jörmungandr (Mighty-snake), a giant sea creature known as the Midgard Serpent that bites itself on its own tail and surrounds the human world, called Midgard or the Middle Earth. Thor will fight heroically and vanquish the beast, but after walking nine steps he will fall dead from its venom. Yet after all this destruction and moral chaos has ended, a new world will arise from the sea. Some of the gods will survive, as will two humans who will then repeople the Earth.

While Ragnarök is the end of the world as we know it, it is not “the end of history” in the Judeo-Christian sense. A new world will arise from its ashes. Our goal should be to sow seeds that can grow into strong trees bearing fine fruits in the future. Whether this post-catastrophic culture — which will most likely have a different mythology and maybe a different concept of morality to go with it compared to what we have now — will be a revived version of Western civilization or an entirely new version of European civilization I do not know, but I tend to suspect the latter. It is hard to predict such things, but a crucial challenge will no doubt be to break with the mentality of “progress” towards “equality,” since a toxic combination of these two concepts is burying us under dangerous and biologically unsustainable egalitarian ideals.

The coming crash will at the very least lead to an ideological-political paradigm shift and the rise of a new mythology to replace the post-WWII “suicide paradigm” of misunderstood anti-Nazism and deranged altruism. At worst, the discontinuity will be so long and severe that what emerges on the other side will be a completely new civilization, another generation of European civilization, just like what emerged during the Middle Ages was a different civilization from that of Greco-Roman Antiquity. The transition between the first and second generations of European civilization took centuries. History generally moves faster now than it did back then, but I suspect such a transition will nevertheless take several generations.

How a new civilization would look like I do not know. Medieval Europeans used different elements of the Greco-Roman legacy creatively and added innovations on top of this. Generation Two of European civilization contained within itself aspects of Generation One, but also had elements of sharp discontinuity. This will probably be the case next time, too.

As Geoffrey Parker reminds us in The Cambridge History of Warfare, the overall aim of Western strategy “almost always remained the total defeat and destruction of the enemy, and this contrasted starkly with the military practice of many other societies.” He highlights the combination of technological innovation and discipline as key traits of the Western military tradition. It is not true that Europeans are particularly ethnocentric; if anything, it is the total lack of ethnocentrism that constitutes our greatest problem today. However, it is true that in addition to being great explorers, artists and scientists we have also been great warriors when circumstances have called for this. This particular cultural trait is, admittedly, very well hidden in our age of decadence, betrayal and suicidal tolerance, but it can be brought back.

We will most likely enter a prolonged period of great turbulence and upheaval; the bubble of welfare state “cradle-to grave security” is about to burst. This process will be painful, but necessary, and is in any case more or less inevitable by now. In 1911 Western Europeans still ruled much of the world. In 2011 we don’t even rule the suburbs in our own major cities, and some learned observers seriously predict the end of European civilization altogether.

This also implies that for the first time in centuries we are the underdogs. There are many historical examples, from the Persian invasions of ancient times to the Muslim invasions later, where Europeans have performed at our best when we have been the underdogs. Perhaps we can do the same once the Multicultural madness retreats. We need to make sure, though, that those who have championed the toxic ideas of Multiculturalism and mass immigration of alien tribes disappear with it. If that happens, we can give our descendants a fresh start and lay the foundations for a new Renaissance, where European civilization can flourish once more.