Saturday, January 10, 2015

Enough Part 3: Coping With The Objectors

Much of the effort that must go into saving the country will be educational: not in the conventional sense of teaching facts to people who don’t already know them (or haven’t been allowed to learn them), but in eliciting their ability to deduce logically from what they already know, and encouraging them to use it.

This is particularly important in the matter of Islam.

An anonymous commenter to this essay recently said:

I'm still having a hard time with universally grouping certain people who otherwise show no evil tendencies into the same group as true evil practitioners just because they were born into and raised under a particular religion. If you all are truly correct in your blanket approach, I'm sure I'll come around, because I have a lot of respect for the management and contributors here, rarely finding a word I disagree with. Meanwhile I will continue to evaluate my cautious case-by-case outlook.

I replied:

It’s like this, Anon:
  1. The dictates of Islam mandate the conversion, subjugation, or death of all non-Muslims;
  2. To declare oneself a Muslim is to endorse the dictates of Islam;
  3. A declared Muslim therefore subscribes to that doctrine.

The usual rejoinder from people who don’t want to believe such a thing about their “nice, peaceable neighbors” always reduces either to “well, they reject that part of it” or “oh, they don’t really mean it.” Yet in every nation that has permitted Islam to gain a foothold among as much as 5% of its residents, the results have been the same:

  • Demands for special privileges and accommodations on the basis of Islam;
  • Disruption of public thoroughfares and events that displease Muslims;
  • Brutalization of women, girls, Jews, homosexuals, and “dissidents;”
  • Eventually, the establishment of Islamic exclaves (look it up) where the laws of the nation are set aside in favor of sharia.

That puts both the “reject that part” and the “don’t mean it” exculpations in the toilet where they belong.

(The Islamic doctrines of taqiyya and kitman are of particular importance to this progression. If you aren’t yet familiar with those terms, get familiar now!)

The problem, as I said in that previous piece, is Americans’ near to uniform unwillingness to believe ill of persons that have not palpably harmed them. Yet were those neighbors to style themselves Nazis – a creed which, though it lacks Islam’s theological decorations, is no more hostile to American principles than Islam is, proclaims many of the same doctrines and objectives, and indeed had the support of the highest Islamic authorities during World War II – the reaction would be diametrically the opposite, “nice, peaceable neighbors” or not. Muslims get special treatment because they claim to be following a religion.

It’s plainly high time that Americans learn to distinguish genuine religions from fake ones.

The strawman thrown up by many defenders of Islam (and of the continued uncritical admission of immigrats from Islamic countries) is that “we can’t deport all those people!” That, of course, has no bearing on whether the U.S. continues to admit such persons. But more to the point, deporting the estimated 3 million Muslims already in America is neither necessary nor politically desirable.

What’s required of us is:

  • Heightened vigilance toward Muslims and Islamic institutions;
  • Refusal to grant Muslims any privileges, whether legal or commercial, on the basis of their creed;
  • Intolerance of any activity by Muslims that disrupts the peaceable, lawful activities of other Americans (e.g., blocking public thoroughfares to “pray”).

Have no doubt of it: Those measures will make some Muslims very angry. They expect to get special privileges and accommodations; when they don’t get them by merely demanding them, they tend toward more militant measures, including open lawbreaking. Were they to be treated as we would treat other Americans under the same circumstances, those incapable of adjusting to the norm would either self-deport or languish in prison. The rest could be long as we never, ever cease to watch them closely and admit no more of them to our nation.

It’s not cosmological physics. Hell, it’s not even rocket science.

Finally, Muslims are adept at fan-dancing their aims behind insincere protestations of tolerance. However, when compelled to face a sharp, yes or no question about their vicious aims and willingness to use violence to get their way, they invariably evade it:

David Horowitz is a highly experienced debater. He knows how to put an opponent on the spot – and he doesn’t hesitate to do so when the occasion demands it, even when the opponent is a sweet-looking young woman with a mouth full of “welcome.” In the above clip, perhaps the most valuable video evidence of Islam’s treachery available today, he provides a flawless demostration of the technique, with which every alert and aware American should familiarize himself.

To conclude: quite recently, we were blessed with a bald refutation of the old saw that “Islam means peace” by one who ought to know very well:

And also, most explicitly:

Both these clips are absolutely crucial to a clear understanding of the threat Islam represents toward the Western, Christian-Enlightenment cultures of the First World...especially that of the United States of America.

Connect the dots.

1 comment:

grayjohn said...

I really hate this bastard.