Jihad - Terror Attacks by Islamics

On September 11th 2001 America suffered the worst and bloodiest attack in its history. Nearly 3,000 innocent civilians were brutally murdered in the unprovoked assault. They were murdered because they lived, worked and prospered in America, the world’s beacon of liberty and the guardian its freedoms.

Their murderers were a cadre of Islamic terrorists who were part of a vast global network of religious fanatics who have declared Holy War on the United States and the West and, as part of their Jihad, pronounced a death sentence on every man, woman and child living in our borders. With the potential for mass destruction made possible with modern technology, this Jihad confronts us with a threat our civilization has never before known.

This threat did not begin with 9/11. The 1990’s were marked by a series of Islamic terror attacks against the United States. The response of our elected officials was mainly passive in the face of these attacks. Missiles were launched into Afghanistan and Iraq by the Clinton Administration but to little effect and not as part of a sustained response. Neither the American public nor our military forces on the ground were mobilized or engaged. Our government remained inert as the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania and the USS Cole were bombed. The threat grew; terrorists were trained, deployed and then organized into cells that stretched across Europe and the United States. The result was a catastrophic attack on the very same building, the World Trade Center, that had been attacked by the jihadis eight years earlier in 1993.

After overthrowing the Taliban, the theocratic regime that had provided a base for the 9/11 attack, we returned to our illusion of peace and safety. When the Bush Administration summoned us to war against a second base of terror in Iraq, only half the nation responded to the call. This war has been called a “distraction” from the war on terror, even though the terrorists themselves, beginning with Osama bin Laden, call it the central front of their jihad and have described their goal as making Iraq the next homeland for their terror apparatus. Because of the campaign by the “anti-war” opposition in our own country, we are in a state of denial about the reality of the war that has been declared on us. Consquently, we are grossly unprepared for the dangers that surround us and unwilling to do what is necessary for our safety. Our populace as a whole is ignorant of the threat, underestimates our enemy, and is unaware of its true intent, capabilities and resolve. That lack of understanding and urgency is particularly apparent on our college campuses, where an unwillingness to focus on the face of the enemy is often compounded by a tendency to blame America first.

To dramatize the struggle for survival our nation faces, we concerned students have decided to launch the Terrorism Awareness Project. We will provide informational literature, films, posters, advertisements, speakers, and panel discussions s whose purpose is to make our fellow students aware of the Islamic jihad and the terrorist threat, and to mobilize support for the defense of America and the civilization of the West.

The cost of continued complacency will be lethal. The terrorists will attack us again. The only questions are Where? and When?

The war against the Islamic jihad and its religion of terror will be decisively won if we both understand the nature of the threat that confronts us and have the will to face it. The Terrorism Awareness Project will assist in achieving both these objectives. Under its banner, college students across America can take their place in defending America, which is under siege both abroad and at home.

from Terrorism Awareness Project (TAP)


Terrorism Awareness Project is a program of the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

Kabylia Observer: A Muslim’s Way Out of Islam

A Muslim’s Way Out of Islam
by Zorro


Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Hossain Salahuddin, a poet, essayist and an ex-Muslim who is the author of several books. He is the editor of the magazine Maverick, which promotes literature, freethinking and rationalism.

FP: Hossain Salahuddin, welcome to FrontPage interview.

HS: Thanks very much for having me. It’s a real pleasure to be here.

FP: Tell us about your childhood and your upbringing within Islam.

HS: I was born in 1984, into a Muslim family in Bangladesh . My family was rather orthodox and they made sure I learn the Quran properly even before they enrolled me in a school. I had a home tutor Mullah, who taught me reciting Quran in Arabic- and I was actually good at it. I remember completing the whole Arabic Quran three times before I turned 12 without even understanding a word of it. If I try to remember, I can feel that it was pretty suffocating with all sorts of do’s and don’t. You can’t do this, you can’t do that, and there was that constant reminder- “You are a Muslim, you should act like one.”

So, yeah, my childhood was not something that I am really proud of. There were all sorts of religious restraints around my neck and that actually affected my relationship with my family members. But, I should say I was still a believer back then; only there was a slight discomfort in me with the practicing form of Islam. I admit that I had a rather troubled childhood but I didn’t turn into a rebel just yet.

FP: What caused your second thought and your ultimate abandoning of Islam?

HS: Well, when I was around 13 or 14, I developed a great interest in creative writing, especially in poetry and I started to spend a lot of time reading books and writing poetry. I remember borrowing up to ten books at a time and reading them in a row. History, Science, Philosophy, Religion, Literature name it, all sorts of books. It was a fascinating time I can tell you that. I guess I was mentally a bit matured than my actual age, and I really cherish that part of my life as a period of illumination.

I think books taught me to think and judge things rationally, to escape from the world of prejudice and irrational beliefs. Books were my true liberator, it’s the best companion I ever had. But, it wasn’t always fun. My family didn’t take it lightly as they were noticing some change in me and also my teachers at school. In fact it was the teachers who gave me all sorts of trouble. Unfortunately, most of my teachers were very orthodox Muslims and they didn’t like my writings. They even banned my writings from the school magazine which really upset me given that I was probably the only student who could write creative things. And they were constantly reminding me that Islam doesn’t approve poetry, music, painting, mixing with non-Muslims or reading texts of other religion and it really confused me.

There was only one way to find out: by reading Quran and Hadith in my mother tongue. I read the Quran over and over again and couldn’t believe what I was reading. I started to mark the questionable verses and wrote comments beside them. I wondered, are these versus full of hate being spread and preached everyday in all corners of my town? I was completely dumbstruck. Initially, I thought it was the translation that was to be blamed. But I collected many different translations of the Quran and very reputed Islamic scholars translated some of them. You can say I was really shocked and I spent almost two years of my year 9 and 10 searching for answers.

At year 10, my first book of poems was published and by year 11, I was convinced that Islam itself was a very violent belief. By reading Quran or any other Islamic text in your mother tongue, there can be two effects on you: you could either turn into a violent, brainwashed Muslim ready to eliminate anything that opposes you, or you could abandon Islam altogether and become a free man. I choose the former path and at a very young age.

FP: Did you face the threat of violence for leaving Islam? Are you still in danger today?

HS: Well, leaving Islam was not an instant decision; it was rather a gradual process. I think by the time I reached 12, I consciously abandoned Islam altogether. And some of my closest friends knew about my views on Islam. I think some of them were really shocked. So, leaving Islam was a private matter at the beginning, I didn’t share it with lot of people initially.

Obviously there was the fear of making a majority of Muslims upset. So, what I did was, I started to question a lot to spread my message. I learned it from the life of Socrates, that’s what he used to do, and it can be very effective sometimes. I started to question Islamic beliefs and traditions in a lot in my writing and that put me in trouble. Although I had some like-minded friends and we used to call ourselves Freethinkers, I made some nasty enemies as well and I was aware that they were watching my every step. But, you know I was young and careless—so I kept going.

Finally, the waiting game was over and they physically attacked me one night- I was very lucky to escape only with some sharp cuts and bruises. After that incident I slowed down a bit, stopped going outside and tried to concentrate on writing at home. I think it was in 2002, when an Islamist organization published a book and declared me a Nastik-Murtad or “Apostate-Infidel”. So, I didn’t really have to declare leaving Islam publicly, they did the honor for me.

After that I decided to leave the country and in 2003 I came to Australia as a student. And if you are asking whether I am still in danger today, well all I can say is that I never underestimate their reach. It’s not just me, anyone who is non-Muslim, or a born-Muslim who doesn’t care about Islam much — anyone who is different from them is in danger today and it’s the sad reality.

FP: What are your thoughts on Arab imperialism and Islamic colonialism? And how does a non-Arab convert’s mind work in this context?

HS: What always struck me the most was that Islam is another form of Arab colonialism in disguise. In South-east Asia you will see people constantly cry about the British Colonialism and how they are still a victim of it. However, no one ever talks about the Arab colonialism which is very active in every single non-Arab Muslim country. Islam is in its origin an Arab religion, and it is not a religion of conscience, private belief or spirituality; it is very political and imperial. Its holy places are in Arab lands, its sacred language is Arabic, and its historical figures are all native Arab. So what happens to a non-Arab convert’s mind is very interesting.

A convert starts to dislike his own culture as non-Islamic and he becomes fascinated by the Arab influence and wants to be a part of the Arab story; ironically, he starts to praise the Arab Warrior who conquered his land. And to do that the first thing he does is to turn away from everything that is ethnically his and he lives in a world of fundamentalist fantasy to purify his non-Islamic culture.

You can see this neurosis and nihilism in the mindset of converts and you can say it is an incurable mental disease which has been affecting them and disturbing the societies for thousands of years. Arab colonialism is both political and cultural and I think it is the longest surviving form of colonialism. You see it is now a fashion to blame European Imperialism and colonialism, west and Israel in general - for every ill in this planet; Muslims are never ashamed to join this blame game. But, when it comes to Arab imperialism or Islamic colonialism, Muslims feel proud and they admire the warriors who once came from the Arab world and conquered their forefathers’ land.

This way, Islamic colonialism and Arab imperialism together have conquered and destroyed many advanced and ancient civilizations and brought catastrophic changes in the cultures of the conquered lands. You can say Arabs were the most successful imperialists of all time, because the faithful converts love to be conquered by the legendary “Holy Warriors” of the “ Holy land ” – it is some sort of salvation for the converts.

FP: Your interpretation of Islam’s holy war?

HS: Islam has always been associated with political expansion and that’s where Jihad or holy war comes into affect. Quran and Hadith repeatedly say that nothing is greater, so far as goodness goes, than Jihad in the name of Allah. Some apologists will try to tell you that Islam is a religion of peace, Jihad is allegorical, and it does not mean violence etc. But the bloody history of Islam tells us a very different story. And the Quran is actually supposed to be taken literally. Muhammad repeatedly said that the Quran is not poetry or allegory; it is the clear voice of Allah himself so that everyone can understand and take it seriously; it is actually blasphemous even to think the Quran as an allegory.

In Hadith, the collection of traditions, Muhammad asked his followers to stop any un-Islamic practice by force many times. As a religion, Islam has a long tradition of deep rooted hatred towards unbelievers. In the Quran, Allah repeatedly commanded Muslims to engage in Holy war and promised unlimited reward in the afterlife if one becomes a martyr in the war for the glory of Allah.

If you ask a Turkish Sufi Dervish who does that beautiful swirling dance, you won’t get the literal picture of Islam. You will rather get a pleasant humanitarian view of the Mystic Sufi philosophy. But, unfortunately, Mainstream Islam considers Sufis heretics and they were regularly persecuted by orthodox Muslims throughout history.

To find out the true meaning of Jihad, you have to look at the life of Muhammad, his companions and the later rulers and thinkers of Islam. You will get an extremely violent picture. Even Muhammad’s immediate successors used the term Jihad to refer to the conquest of new territory, so I don’t see much scope for misunderstanding here.

No matter what apologists try to tell you about the meaning of Jihad, to most Muslims it simply means Expansion of Allah’s Kingdom in the command of Allah himself. If they die in the pursuit they are a martyr or Sahid, someone who is guaranteed by Allah to go to heaven straightway without facing the trial in the judgment day.

Islamic scholars like Taqi al din ibn Taymiyyah, Mohammad ibn abdul Wahhab, Sayyid Qutb, Abdullah Mawdudi, Hasan al Turabi have a lot to answer for in this matter. Modern Jihadists frequently cite these scholars as their source of inspiration. They argued that Muslims are in a cosmic battle against the force of darkness. These forces of darkness should not be tolerated, and although Allah is ultimately responsible for the destruction of darkness, Muslims are required to fight it. That’s why as of today no famous Muslim cleric or Muslim country condemned terrorism. You see, almost everything of the western way of life contradicts Islamic belief - the West automatically becomes the target, hence, Islamic scholars divided the whole world into two different spheres: Islamic World or Land of Peace and Un-Islamic World or Land of warfare.

FP: So Islamic terrorists are not misinterpreting Islam?

HS: No, terrorists are not misinterpreting Islam; in fact they are interpreting Islam very correctly. Theologically, it is a Muslim’s holy duty to fight until the whole world turns to one Allah because there can not be any other God. Allah is pretty autocratic among the Gods and he doesn’t like to co-exist with any other deity. It sounds funny but its true; how many Muslim countries practice democracy? Liberalism, individual privacy and freedom, freedom of speech and freedom of belief - all of this and any other component of modernity you can think of directly contradicts Islamic belief.

No matter what apologists say, “Islam” and “freedom” are two opposite words with opposite meanings. You see, unlike Christianity and Buddhism Islam is not a personal religion; Islam is very practical, social, highly political, and unspiritual and its goal is to win the world empire. Islam penetrates even very personal aspects of human life and dictates. Islamic law or Sharia is considered divine legislation and it dictates every single aspects of human life, from using toothpicks to how to perform sex; from slaughtering animals to what verse you should recite when you are in a toilet etc. Anything you can think of.

FP: What are your views on Muhammad and his worshippers?

HS: To me, Muhammad is undoubtedly one of the most influential characters of human history in the sense that billions of Muslims are still ready to die for him, and it is unique given the extent of his influence. However, one of Muhammad’s few likable characteristics was that he never claimed himself to be perfect although billions of Muslims think so today.

I think Muhammad was always aware of his human shortcomings and he did everything to ensure that he is not worshipped instead of God. But, to Muslims Muhammad is sinless, the most perfect and greatest man who ever lived in this planet, and he is even the greatest of all prophets. Every Muslim worships Muhammad, knowingly or unknowingly and reacts with unprecedented violence if he is defamed by a cartoonist or a novelists or anyone in that matter.

However, if you follow Muhammad biography recorded by famous Muslim scholars such as Bukhari, Ibn Ishaq, Al tabari you will find many incidences of Muhammad being far from a perfect, sinless man. His cruelty towards Jews, Meccan Pagans and his rivals is well recorded by Muslim historians. He massacred three entire Jewish tribes - Banu Nadir, Banu Qurayaza and Banu Qaynuqa; killed the prince of Khaibar and made his wife captive to his tent: there are numerous examples; you just have to read the Muslim biographers in any translation you wish.

Apologists of Islam will try to justify these actions with there hollow logics; but if you are a prophet you should have a better moral outlook than the average human. Muhammad married 12 or 13 times — which contradicts his own preaching of a maximum four marriages, but what I find most disturbing is, Muhammad married his closest friend Abubakkar’s 6 year old daughter Ayesha. Now if you do that in a modern civilized world, you will be disgraced as a pedophile and spend the rest of your life in prison.

In another disturbing incident, Muhammad was attracted to his adopted son’s wife Zayanab and later even married her. As a leader, he failed to announce his successor which led to the bloody Shia-Sunni division in Islam and you see the second, third and fourth Caliphs of Islam all were assassinated as a result of this power struggle. These are just a few of the incidents of a very eventful life of a very influential man. But, as far as I am concerned, Muhammad was no saint. No doubt he is extremely influential, but I don’t see a perfect-sinless man in him as Muslims try to idolize.

FP: Let’s talk a bit more about Islam as a totalitarian belief system – as you discussed earlier.

HS: As I said earlier, Islam is in a cosmic battle against the un-Islamic world. I think - apart from the mystical Sufi sects, who are mostly branded as heretics by mainstream Muslims - the rest of the Islamic world and its belief systems are undoubtedly totalitarian in nature.

You see, followers of no other religion try to create international associations of nation-states that are based on religion. Only Muslims do and they call it ummah or followers of Muhammad, very similar with socialists and communist revolutionaries.

In personal label, Islam tries to penetrate every phase of life; the sole purpose of Sharia law is to control religious, social and political life of mankind in all of its aspects. Jihad and Sharia are two ultimate tools of Islam’s control mechanism. Muhammad’s life reflects the very nature of a totalitarian system. There was no separation of church and state; not just a prophet Muhammad performed as a statesman, lawmaker, judge, community leader and in many other roles.

So, you can clearly see the beginning was totalitarian in nature. Muslims are required to follow the Quran, the Hadith (deeds and words of Muhammad) and the verdict of Islamic scholars in case the answer is not found in the scriptures. Interestingly, while all other law is human and constantly evolving, Sharia is divine and immutable - human intelligence cannot criticize it, it must be accepted without any doubts and questions.

So, you can see a very tightly controlled society here without any hope of individual freedom. Sharia contains all sorts of crazy principles, such as, intolerance towards pagans and Jews, inequality between man and woman, religious, social and financial restrictions for non-Muslims citizens, acceptance of slavery and polygamy, barbaric punishments like chopping hands and feats from opposite sides to pulling out eyes and beheading — all sorts of things.

These laws were handed down over a thousand year ago and they didn’t evolve since then. Clearly Sharia is out of touch and not compatible in our twenty-first century. In the last thousand years we have progressed a lot, but the Islamic law and its worldview is stuck in the medieval desert, for generations Muslims are stuck with it as well and they need rescue. No surprise, there is hardly any intellectual progress in Muslim societies. How can there be progress if they regard the Quran as eternal truth and the final solution for all the problems? Progress requires change, Islam is unchangeable. This is why Islam is not just a religion, it is a totalitarian belief system and Muslims are the first victims of it — but very few of them realize that.

FP: How about those Muslim reformers who are trying to bring Islam into the democratic and modern world? Is there any hope for their efforts? If they asked you for help, what advice would you give them?

HS: Look, I don’t think you can be a Muslim and a reformer at the same time; it’s a paradox and contradictory in terms. Islam forbids reformation, and Muslims feel proud boasting that unlike the Bible, the Quran didn’t go through different editions and versions; it is pure, holy and untouched.

Muhammad insisted throughout his life that the Quran is the literal word of God - the truth once and for all, that’s it. So how can you bring reformation and remain a true Muslim? That’s a puzzling contradiction and I think it is misleading too. These reformers will keep telling you that Islam is the religion of peace and real Islam doesn’t approve the actions of the Talibans, Islam has nothing to do with Jihadists etc. You will eventually get tired of that. This denial is pathetic, you don’t have to go that far to see if real Islam has anything to do with these barbaric acts or not. Just read the Quran, Hadith, Sharia - Islamic texts and they are everywhere. That’s why it is so important to permit debate and criticism about Islam across the globe. Honest and sharp intellectual engagement is very crucial to create a democratic and modern nation.

FP: What advice would you advise to those who want to save western civilization? How best can we fight our enemy in the total war?

HS: London , New York , Sydney - all these big cities have one thing in common: most Muslims go there to improve their economic condition - big cities are like beauty queens- used by all and loved by none.

Most Muslims have already made it very clear that they have no intention of being assimilated into the host society; instead they are repeatedly asking to implement Sharia Law in Canada , UK , and Australia — as if it is up to the host society to change instead.

To a Muslim mind, Islam is a universal religion and he hopes some day the whole of humanity will embrace Islam. So, there is an element of expansion mentality in them, because Islam is not limited to home and personal relationship. To Muslims, Islam is a complete code of life and society must adhere to that code. So, you see, the world view of Islam is very totalitarian and you have to fight it intellectually, not just militarily. It is also a war of ideologies, we must not forget.

Unfortunately, some western societies continue to turn a blind eye when there is a Muslim-on-Muslim violence: such as, teenagers forced by migrant parents to follow Islamic codes. Some western societies are too politically correct to take any action when a freethinker is attacked for his unbelief, scared of losing the popular Muslim vote or political support. I believe that the West must always adhere to its secular principles and take prompt actions when there is violence against women or somebody is forced to follow Islamic codes. This will send a very clear message to Islamists and potential jihadists. There are an increasing number of Islamic schools in western countries, this is another way to brainwash children at a very early age and isolate them from the mainstream society by implying that We are Muslims, they are Christians; we are different. They eat pig, we don’t; we are different, by forcing girls to wear hijab sends a clear message: we are sacred, they are not, and they are whorelike.

So, it is very dangerous to turn a blind eye in such incidences in the name of promoting multiculturalism. Respect for other cultures, other values is important and a crucial component of secularism and democracy; but, if these other values are here to destroy our own civilization and modernity - then we have fight them vigorously- with reason, argument, criticism, legal and military means if it turns into violence- so that our values of civilization are protected.

Religious belief is fine; but the practices, literal submission to scriptures; religious institutions should not be tolerated. By saying that, a Muslim should have absolute freedom to his personal religion; but if he jumps up and demands the death penalty of a writer or preaches hatred in a community he should be disciplined accordingly by law.

As I said, the West must adhere to its secular principle and defend its democratic right and freedom at all costs and politicians should stop being too politically correct and they should be unapologetic when it comes to defending the core values of civilization.

However, we should remember it is not necessarily a battle between the west and Islam — as some like to portray it to fulfill there own agenda. As I said before, Jihadists divide the whole world into two spheres - Islamic world and un-Islamic world. I won’t do that. To me, it is the ultimate battle between those who value freedom, peace and humanity and those who do not, and we must triumph at all cost for the sake of our own existence.

FP: Hossain Salahuddin, thank you for joining Frontpage Interview. Thank you for your bravery and your fight for freedom and truth.

HS: It’s an honor. Thanks.

www.frontpagemag.com
http://www.kabylia.info/observer/spip.php?article129

The kabyle people: a blind colonized

by Zorro

The kabyle people is not aware that it is colonized because this colonization is pernicious, insidious and takes a legal and legitimate forme. The kabyle people believes it suffers simply an injustice on the part of his rulers. Kabylia harbours no Arab-Muslim owners or no military troops patrolling streets and villages. The only form of colonization that the Kabyle recognize is similar to the French colonization. Kabylia does not interests Arab-Muslims for two reasons. The first is that it is a barren land where we must work hard to expect to pull something. The terrain is not suitable for Arab-Muslim lifestyle. That’s precisely why they had abandoned Kabylia to all the rebels, the never submitted, the protesters of any time to seek refuge there.

It was a place of revilement of all those who refused the Arab-Califal order. The Aurès of Chawi had the same status and as well for the Tuaregs in the end funds Sahara, as well as the Mozabits at the desert doors. One can say that these places were and are always sorts of open-air areas prisons in which Cultural prisoners never have been free to live their culture and their language in a proud and flourishing way. The detained are subject to rules laid down by guards outside the prison world. Only a few guard posts are scattered here and there to ensure that the Rules of Procedure of this huge prison is respected. these guard posts are Wilaya seats, seats of daira, gendarmerie posts, barracks, courts, schools, mosques and so on … None of these guard posts is democratically administered by Kabyles, nor in the interest of Kabyles.

Moreover, the population is exclusively kabyle and nobody has challenged their property, their intra-mural language, their circumscribed culture. It’s like in a real prison where “residents” are doing their small business, creating a language, practices, behaviors that guards and the administration did not acknowledge but punish some times when the authority of the prison institution is threatened. It is therefore no direct colonization such as France had done. It is a physical and moral encirclement. The Arab-Islamism is working to “contain” the Kabyles in Kabylia and to keep them under its authority.

This remote colonization has lasted so long that the kabyle collective memory eventually find it normal. With the FFS, the RCD and Arouche, Kabyle believes that this kabyle prison extends even throughout Algeria. This is why they are demanding democracy, and therefore freedom, for all algerians. The algerians laugh at their noses and Arab-Muslim elites are offended that sub-citizens (Kabyles) are demanding freedom for citizens (Algerians) who have always been free to be what they want, to live their culture, promote and develop their language, practice and impose their religion … It’s like a the series STALAG 13, where a band of American officers prisoners of the Germans in 1943, intend to help the German people to get rid of the Nazis who were elected democratically.

It’s funny! The Algerian administration controling the Amazigh and the kabylity prisons offers only two alternatives to the Kabyles:

The first to leave their region in a mass but gradual exodus to merge individually in the Algerian Arab-Muslim mass, without organized communities everywhere. I worked in a few Algerian cities and I noticed that all Kabyle I knew got their homes much faster than the Arab residents of these cities. Let them acculturate themselves in the Arab-Islamic social game (friends, mosques, talking, parties, language, local expressions etc. …..)

The second alternative is that the Kabyles allow to Arab-Islamize themselves on the spot to come into harmony with the local guard posts. In a way, cultural prisoners must redeem and arabize themselves so their goalkeeper does no appear anymore as guardians imposing regulation (laws, customs). Thus the prisons opens and the Arab-Muslim can come from outside, move, blend into the crowd now totally arabized and islamized, purchase goods, funds commerce, buildings, land and so on. .. This is a release by mutation. It eliminates the socio-cultural problem specific to kabylia and there will be no problem.

The Algerian regime is moving towards one of these solutions, or both together. The Kabyle have not yet understood and persist to behave as cultural inmates demanding better life conditions in prison. The Kabyles believe that the maximum Arab-Islamism can do is to surround the Kabylity in order to not let it spread. But the Arab-Islamism wants more: delete kabylity in a very short term because the number of Kabyles discovering their situation is growing more and more. The more the Algerian regime arabize the Kabyles, the more the Kabyles who refuse arabization become effective, strong, determined, resilient and ready to act.

Arilès Translation: Jugurten
http://www.kabylia.info/observer/spip.php?article127

Islam an Ever-Present Danger to Western Civilization

Islamic Danger

Islam is a religion still grounded in principles formulated by its prophet in the 8th century. Then it spread like wildfire by conquest and subterfuge, which Mohammed preached and practiced. He justifies lying to unbelievers when this furthers the Moslem cause. Ever since, the desire to extend Islamic rule to non-Moslem areas has been deeply embedded in the minds of Moslems - the masses attending mosques and their rulers no less than fundamentalist extremists. Islam is by far the most political of all religions because the realization of this desire depends on concrete political and military action by Moslem regimes. However, Islam’s injunction to Moslem rulers to extend their rule to non-Moslem territory is limited by the pragmatic proviso that those too strong or too distant to be conquered can be left alone until circumstances are more propitious. This is why Moslem aggression ceased to trouble Europe after the 17th century.

It is in the forefront of Moslem minds today precisely because the United States recreated Moslem power by its policy of decolonization, accompanied by the developing of natural resources in Moslem states which were then allowed to be partially or wholly expropriated. It is important to understand why these policies and the Western encouragement of Moslem territorial expansion have not only made all Moslem rulers and their Moslem subjects more aggressive but have caused a revival of fundamentalist Islam. The idea that Moslems can be propitiated and kept peaceful by economic development and political concessions is the reverse of the truth. Their reaction is that concessions by unbelievers prove that Allah has begun to favor the believers. So the more powerful Moslem states become, economically and/or politically, the greater will be their religiously motivated appetite for territorial expansion at the infidel’s expense.

The US belief that its generosity to Moslems would be rewarded by loyalty was mistaken. Loyalty to unbelievers is not a Moslem trait. Pragmatism is. And pragmatism prescribes that when dealing with fools one milks them for all one can get, demoralizes them until they are incapable of protecting their interests, and then deprives them of any influence they have left. The Moslem world today has no love and very little respect for the Western powers in general and the United States in particular. It was for many years a bitterly divided world, where individual rulers competed with each other for wealth, influence and sometimes territory. This was why the wealthy states of the Gulf Cooperation Council were ready to accept protection from American and other Western forces. But four decades of prattling about decolonization and "globalism" have made their mark. If globalism is a good reason for uniting Europe, preventing it is a better reason for uniting Moslem states (which have much more in common than the Europeans) on a policy to wrest power from the unbelievers.

For this purpose, the Moslems enjoy one crucial advantage over the Chinese. Many millions of Chinese live outside China. A fair proportion of them may wish to encourage trade with China. But very few sympathize with Chinese communism or are ready to serve the political aspirations of Beijing. In the ideological sense, the opposite is true of Moslems. Even before the policies of Moslem states have been more or less coordinated, the Moslem dispersion, including Moslems in the US and Western Europe, will provide plenty of volunteers for an active fifth column and for terrorism serving the cause of Islam. Indeed, it has already begun to do so.

Thorough knowledge of US foreign policy during the 1946-2000 period is of vital importance to anyone attempting a serious diagnosis of the weaknesses threatening Western civilization from this direction. Whatever happens to the only superpower is likely to affect the fate of Western Europe. The Europeans only make matters worse by trying to compete with the US for Moslem favors. But perhaps the most serious problem of the West is that the Moslem states are aware of Western greed and its political repercussions. They had very good reasons to believe they will not be punished for increasing their military, political and economic capacity to a point at which they can blackmail the West into accepting their political, cultural or religious demands. Today, after the terrorist attack on New York and Washington, they are hoping that the US will settle for destroying Bin Laden and the Taleban and gradually resume its oil-dictated pro-Moslem policies.

For during the post-World War II era, the United States has tended to support authoritarian Moslem dictatorships on vital territorial issues when their interests conflicted with those of non-Moslem states, needlessly increasing their self-confidence and strategic importance. Israel was compelled to return the Sinai Peninsula (which it had occupied during a defensive war in 1967) to Egypt and may yet be told to cede the strategically vital Golan Heights to Syria – one of the main sponsors of radical and fundamentalist Islamic terrorism. Lebanon, created to provide self-determination for its Christians (then a majority), was allowed to fall under Syrian rule, causing the destruction of the Christian power structure and mass Christian emigration. In the Balkans, the US intervened militarily and falsified election results to maintain a Islamic regime in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Then it used massive military strikes to help Moslem Albania separate the Kosovo province from Serbia, of which it has been an integral part for centuries, disregarding the anarchy in Albania where armed gangs compete for power and trade in drugs. Now it is trying to help Albanians obtain additional rights and influence in Macedonia.

The only identifiable motive behind this long-term US policy is the greed of American business circles determining it and the profits they reap in oil-rich Moslem states. Promoting democracy abroad is certainly not on the US agenda. Even the occupation of democratic India’s territory by communist China has been ignored for the past 39 years, mainly for reasons already stated, but partly because China was an ally of Moslem Pakistan. Consistency is also not a US hallmark. Its media and "globalist" politicians decry ethnic or ethno-religious nationalism when dealing with West European allies but treat it as almost sacred when Moslems invoke it on behalf of their territorial claims.

The erosion of nationalist and/or religious motivations in the West - especially after the bipolar world and the rival superpower disappeared in 1991 - is another important factor affecting the assessment of the dangers facing Western civilization. At the beginning of this century, the US was still very much a Christian state. Since World War II, it is increasingly gravitating towards agnostic liberalism and cynical materialism. The argument that religion was a great rallying cry for war throughout human history is often used against it. However, few have dared to criticize Islam (as distinct from Islamic fundamentalism) on this account, though the question how to motivate power-wielders and populations in democratic states to deal with Moslem aggression and Moslem terrorism must clearly be faced. Patriotism motivated by ethnic nationalism can be a good substitute for religion in this respect. But agnostic liberalism cannot fulfill this function, especially when it is laced with pacifism and globalism. For a superpower, it is a source of weakness and a serious handicap in dealing with terrorists or religiously motivated aggressors.

Not a single Moslem state is a democracy. When there is serious internal opposition to a Moslem ruler, his rivals sometimes demand "democracy" during their bid to topple him, but never maintain it if they gain power. So there is an obvious contradiction between promoting democracy and supporting Moslem states. The contradiction between supporting globalism with ostensibly equal rights for all races, religions or nations and across-the-board support for Moslem territorial and cultural expansion should be no less obvious. These contradictions are a grave American weakness, as ideological confusion hamstrings the ability to act logically and firmly.

The US advocates globalism because it is a means of imposing on the world economic hegemony by a select group of supra-national corporations and big banks, the large majority of which are American. The assumption is that economic hegemony maintains political hegemony. A few big British, German, Japanese and French companies are allowed to share the profits, partly to keep them quiet, but chiefly because their influence on business circles in their countries may limit opposition to American plans or activities. However, since a goodly proportion of the spoils is in oil-rich Moslem states, the Europeans - and especially France - have not always cooperated. They remember the 1956 Suez crisis and, conscious of the US attempt to gain Moslem goodwill by means of political and territorial concessions, have upped the ante by offering more of the same.

Perhaps the most crucial aspect of assessing the only superpower’s prospects of maintaining its status relates to the impact of its policies on the Moslems. These quickly understood that the American talk about promoting democracy was propaganda for internal consumption and that the US preferred to deal with autocratic rulers, who are much easier to bribe. They also understood that they were in no danger of losing US support for their territorial claims against non-Moslems regardless of how they behaved. Syria is perhaps the outstanding example. It has occupied Lebanon. It has long been on the US list of states supporting terrorism and maintains training camps for 10 terrorist organizations operating against Turkey, Israel, Western Europe and the United States. There is clear evidence that the June 1996 bomb which blew up the USAF quarters in Dhahran, killing 19 Americans, was made in the Syrian-controlled Beka’a Valley and transported to Saudi Arabia by truck through Syria and Jordan with the knowledge and approval of Syrian officials. Moreover, Syria is an ally of Iran and has been doing everything possible to help Iraq outwit the embargo the UN imposed upon it. Yet the US still wants Israel to cede the Golan Heights to Syria!

When dealing with Moslems, this kind of political masochism has a heavy price. It promotes terrorism and it encourages the oil-rich Moslem states to buy off the sponsors of terrorism with political and/or financial support. For the burgeoning of Moslem terrorism - radical as well as fundamentalist - the United States, Britain and France have only themselves to blame. It is safe to predict that this terrorism will be one of the main American security concerns in the 21st century. But the political ambitions of the Moslem world may turn out an equally serious problem.

This analysis began by recalling that throughout human history empires rose by military conquest and fell when their rulers took their power for granted and that the basic cycle of war, occupation, exploitation, negligence and collapse has not changed. It noted that greed has always blinded power-wielders to danger. The greed of the business tycoons promoting globalism is far greater in scale and its impact on humanity than any greed history has known - and just as blind. It has nurtured an enemy who cares more about land than about money and has a profound religious urge to prove his superiority to the infidel. The message of history is that the United States will be unable to stem the tide of Islam in the 21st century unless it abandons globalism and begins to treat Moslem states as potential enemies whose strategic assets and importance must be reduced before it is too late.
http://www.westerndefense.org/special/TwinTowers2001b.htm

Two Americas: One Blind to Terror Threat

By Jack Kelly

The FBI announced Saturday [2006] three Muslim men have been arrested for plotting to blow up fuel tanks and pipelines at John F. Kennedy International Airport.

The New York Times ran a story about the plot in Sunday's paper. On page 30. The front page was reserved for a sympathetic story about Omar Ahmed Khadr, a suspected al Qaida terrorist being held at Guantanamo Bay.

We learned early in that story that Mr. Khadr was only 15 when he was arrested in Afghanistan in 2002; that he is "nearly blind in one eye" from the firefight in which he killed one American soldier and maimed another, and that he "doesn't trust Americans." Only much deeper in the story does reporter William Glaberson mention that young Mr. Khadr's father was a senior deputy to Osama bin Laden.

Had the JFK plot succeeded, thousands of Americans could have been killed, and the economic damage would have been enormous. Reporters Cara Buckley and William Rashbaum don't get around to mentioning this until the 28th paragraph in their story. But in the 5th paragraph, they tell us JFK "was never in imminent danger because the attack was only in a preliminary phase."
The originator of the plot was Russell DeFreitas, 63, a naturalized American citizen born in Guyana who had worked at JFK. Two other conspirators were arrested in Trinidad. A fourth named conspirator is at large. Seven other plotters (listed as Individuals A through G) are mentioned in the indictment.

"One law enforcement official played down Mr. Defreitas' ability to carry out an attack, calling him 'a sad sack' and 'not a grade A terrorist,'" Ms. Buckley and Mr. Rashbaum wrote. The Times reporters did not mention that federal officials suspect Adnan el-Shukrijumah, al Qaida's nuclear expert, may have been involved in the plot.

New York Times reporters also played down the threat posed by six Muslim men arrested May 8 for planning to massacre soldiers at Fort Dix in New Jersey. The original Times story didn't get around to mentioning that the plotters were Muslims until the 6th paragraph. Subsequent stories questioned whether there was a religious motivation for the planned massacre, and speculated that the Fort Dix Six may have been victims of entrapment.

On May 22, the Pew Research Center released a poll which indicated that 26 percent of Muslims in the U.S. under age 30 believe suicide bombings are justified under some circumstances. (Two percent of young Muslims say they're often justified.) "It is a hair-raising number," said Radwan Masmoudi, president of the Washington-based Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy. But the New York Times story on the poll didn't mention this until the 7th paragraph. Brian Knowlton's lead sentence began: "A new poll of American Muslims reveals a group that is better assimilated, more content, and less politically polarized than counterpart Muslim populations in Western Europe."

Some of the less assimilated and more polarized seem to be gathering at Islamberg, a Muslim commune in the Catskills, the New York Post reported Monday.

Neighbors have reported gunfire and military style physical training at the commune, which is thought to be associated with Jamaat al Fuqra. An al-Fuqra member was jailed in a 1996 plot to bomb bridges and tunnels in New York City. Others are suspects in assassinations and fire bombings in the U.S. One neighbor reported seeing commune members dressed in Port Authority uniforms, the Post said.

On ABC's "This Week" program Sunday, Rep. Jack Murtha (D-Pa) said the JFK airport plotters were provoked by the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

Rep. Murtha has difficulty with time lines. Sep. 11, 2001 happened before March 19, 2003, when the Iraq War began. So did the 1993 World Trade Center bombing; the 1996 bombing of the Khobar Towers barracks in Saudi Arabia; the 1998 attacks on the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, and the attack on the USS Cole in 2000.

Radical Islamists have been trying to kill Americans since long before the Iraq war began. There is no reason to suppose they will stop trying to kill Americans when the war in Iraq ends. But in the Democratic presidential debate in Manchester, New Hampshire Sunday night, all the candidates argued, in effect, that our troubles will be over once the troops have been brought home.

There are two Americas, Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards is fond of saying. One recognizes the threat posed by radical Islam. The other is blind to it.

© RealClearPolitics 2006

INTEGRATION, ASSIMILATION, OR DEPORTATION?

What is best for us?

from Separationism:

Fjordman has written at Gates of Vienna (the article is also discussed at VFR):

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

Separationism from View from the Right

from Jihad Watch:

Fitzgerald: Keep them out

"...the rush to the gates of the embassies and consulates of the Western nations with requests for visas in order to reside permanently in those countries..." -- from this article

They must not be allowed in. For the safety of our own citizens in the West, we can't take any more Muslims, and certainly not the most dangerous of all, the Shock Troops of the Lesser Jihad, the local Arabs who were carefully renamed the "Palestinians." They have proven to be at the center of many terrorist plots and schemes. And then they are suddenly identified demurely, so often, as having been "born in Jordan" or "born in Israel" -- and the word "Palestinian" that they always emphasize so often, suddenly disappears.

They are a specific threat to Jews, even a mortal threat. Would the American government knowingly allow into this country, say, neo-Nazis? No. Would it allow in to this country, knowingly, the most extreme white-supremacist followers of Eugene Terre Blanche in South Africa, people who would bring in their mental baggage, say, to this country a desire to reduce the black population to a state of permanent economic, social, and political inferiority? Would they allow in such people when it was clear that their ideology was not merely a personal one, but was so ingrained that it could not be uprooted, and was passed on from generation to generation -- as is Islam?

Continue reading "Fitzgerald: Keep them out"

Posted by Hugh at 08:22 AM Comments (21)
Email this entry Print this entry Digg this del.icio.us

"Whether ... Israel existed or didn't, whether or not we were in Iraq or not, they would be trying to kill us, because it is a dictate of their religion, at least a part of it. And we have to defend ourselves."
-Tom Tancredo (R-CO)

INTEGRATION

If the trend in the UK is any indication, then the trend towards integrating Moslems into free societies will be a dismal failure.

. . . there is no Western country with an Islamic fraction above 5% where Muslims have not demanded special treatment, usually at cost to their host societies and their "infidel" neighbors. They usually get what they demand, owing to Westerners' tendency to defer to "religious" sentiment and our awareness of the demonstrated propensity toward violence of Muslims at a sufficient concentration. The process tends to escalate: small demands, once conceded, are followed by progressively larger ones. The early, small concessions tend to reduce resistance to the later, larger ones. Over time, Islam acquires a superior status, recognized in law and custom even if never explicitly named, and Muslims are considered exempt from requirements and constraints that bind all other persons.
-Francis W. Porretto
Eternity Road

also see
When the Muslim Population Reaches a Critical Mass
Even More Drastic times Call for Even More Drastic Measures


INTEGRATION

from Pedestrian Infidel blogspot

Integration is difficult for the Muslim, too, since his religion forbids true integration. Muslims are exhorted to set themselves apart from the kufar, or infidels. So not only do we have a problem of integrating these people, but we also have a problem with them because they feel superior to us. This is further complicated by the fact that Muslims do not- will not- recognize- man-made, secular laws. Any man-made law is inferior, very inferior, to the laws as laid out by Allah and the Prophet Muhammad in the Shari’ah.

UK Muslims want veils, not integration

Still, the next time there is unrest, the mainstream media will blame the British government for not working to integrate the country's Muslims. "Muslims will not waver over veils," by Jonathan Wynne-Jones in the Sunday Telegraph, with thanks to High:

Britain's Muslim community overwhelmingly believes that women should be allowed to wear the veil, despite fears that it presents a barrier to integration, a study has found.

Almost nine in 10 Muslims think that any government moves to ban the veil would hurt social cohesion.

Schools already have the power to ask pupils to remove the niqab - which covers the entire face apart from a slit for the eyes - to improve safety, security and learning.

There have been calls for a wider debate on whether it is appropriate for the full veil to be worn in public at all. But a Gallup Poll to be published this week found most Muslims firm in the belief that Islamic women should be free to wear it.

While 55 per cent of all those polled thought that removing the veil was vital for integration, only 13 per cent of Muslims agreed.

Instead, they thought that the Government needed to change its economic and political policies toward Islamic countries and show greater respect to Islam.

Posted by Robert on April 15, 2007 06:22 AM at Jihad Watch

Also see this IMPORTANT reference: Moslems Do Not Want to Integrate



The intrepid Paul Williams has a report in Canada Free Press (thanks to all who sent this in) about his visit to Islamberg, New York, a camp run by the jihadist Jamaat ul-Fuqra group. The inhabitants wouldn't let him into the compound, but he talked to some of the locals, and found out a good deal:
For what he found out and what you can do about it,

see
Jihad Watch


Springtime in Islamberg
Radical Muslim paramilitary compound flourishes in upper New YorkState
Islamberg also has a website with photos: http://www.islamberg.org/

By Paul L. Williams Ph.D., (author of THE DAY OF ISLAM)
With the able assistance of Douglas Hagmann, Bill Krayer and Michael Travis

Friday, May 11, 2007 http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/paul-williams051107.htm

Situated within a dense forest at the foothills of the Catskill Mountains on the outskirts of Hancock, New York, Islamberg is not an ideal place for a summer vacation unless, of course, you are an exponent of the Jihad or a fan of Osama bin Laden.

The 70 acre complex is surrounded with "No trespassing" signs; the rocky terrain is infested with rattlesnakes; and the woods are home to black bears, coyotes, wolves, and a few bobcats.

The entrance to the community is at the bottom of a very steep hill that is difficult to navigate even on a bright sunny day in May. The road, dubbed Muslim Lane, is unpaved and marred by deep crevices that have been created by torrential downpours. On a wintry day, few, save those with all terrain vehicles, could venture forth from the remote encampment.

A sentry post has been established at the base of the hill.

The sentry, at the time of this visit, is an African American dressed in Islamic garb - - a skull cap, a prayer shawl, and a loose fitting shalwat kameez. He instructs us to turn around and leave. "Our community is not open to visitors," he says.

Behind the sentry and across a small stream stand dozens of inhabitants of the compound - - the men wearing skull caps and loose fitting tunics, the women in full burqa. They appear ready to deal with any unauthorized intruders.

The hillside is blighted by rusty trailers that appear to be without power or running water and a number of outhouses. The scent of raw sewage is in the air.

The place is even off limits to the local undertaker who says that he has delivered bodies to the complex but has never been granted entrance. "They come and take the bodies from my hearse. They won't allow me to get past the sentry post. They say that they want to prepare the bodies for burial. But I never get the bodies back. I don't know what's going on there but I don't think it's legal."

On the other side of the hill where few dare to go is a tiny village replete with a make-shift learning center (dubbed the "International Quranic Open University"); a trailer converted into a Laundromat; a small, green community center; a small and rather squalid grocery store; a newly constructed majid; over forty clapboard homes; and scores of additional trailers.

It is home to hundreds - - all in Islamic attire, and all African-Americans. Most drive late model SUVs with license plates from Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, South Carolina, and Tennessee. The locals say that some work as tollbooth operators for the New York State Thruway, while others are employed at a credit card processing center that maintains confidential financial records.

While buzzing with activity during the week, the place becomes a virtual hive on weekends. The guest includes arrivals from the inner cities of New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania and, occasionally, white-robed dignitaries in Ray-Bans from the Middle East.

Venturing into the complex last summer, Douglas Hagmann, an intrepid investigator and director of the Northeast Intelligence Service, came upon a military training area at the eastern perimeter of the property. The area was equipped with ropes hanging from tall trees, wooden fences for scaling, a make-shift obstacle course, and a firing range. Hagmann said that the range appeared to have been in regular use.

Islamberg is not as benign as a Buddhist monastery or a Carmelite convent. Nearly every weekend, neighbors hear sounds of gunfire. Some, including a combat veteran of the Vietnam War, have heard the bang of small explosives. None of the neighbors wished to be identified for fear of "retaliation." "We don't even dare to slow down when we drive by," one resident said. "They own the mountain and they know it and there is nothing we can do about it but move, and we can't even do that. Who wants to buy a property near that?"
Islamberg's Grocery Store

The complex serves to scare the bejeesus out of the local residents. "If you go there, you better wear body armor," a customer at the Circle E Diner in Hancock said. "They have armed guards and if they shoot you, nobody will find your body."

At Cousins, a watering hole in nearby Deposit, a barfly, who didn't wish to be identified, said: "The place is dangerous. You can hear gunfire up there. I can't understand why the FBI won't shut it down."

Islamberg is a branch of Muslims of the Americas Inc., a tax-exempt organization formed in 1980 by Pakistani cleric Sheikh Mubarak Ali Gilani, who refers to himself as "the sixth Sultan Ul Faqr," Gilani, has been directly linked by court documents to Jamaat ul-Fuqra or "community of the impoverished," an organization that seeks to "purify" Islam through violence.

Though primarily based in Lahore, Pakistan, Jamaat ul-Fuqra has operational headquarters in New York and openly recruits through various social service organizations in the U.S., including the prison system. Members live in hamaats or compounds, such as Islamberg, where they agree to abide by the laws of Jamaat ul-Fuqra, which are considered to be above local, state and federal authority. Additional hamaats have been established in Hyattsville, Maryland; Red House, Virginia; Falls Church, Virginia; Macon, Georgia; York, South Carolina; Dover, Tennessee; Buena Vista, Colorado; Talihina, Oklahoma; Tulane Country, California; Commerce, California; and Onalaska, Washington. Others are being built, including an expansive facility in Sherman, Pennsylvania.

Before becoming a citizen of Islamberg or any of the other Fuqra compounds, the recruits - - primarily inner city black men who became converts in prison - - are compelled to sign an oath that reads: "I shall always hear and obey, and whenever given the command, I shall readily fight for Allah's sake."

In the past, thousands of members of the U.S. branches of Jamaat ul-Fuqra traveled to Pakistan for paramilitary training, but encampments, such as Islamberg, are now capable of providing book-camp training so raw recruits are no longer required to travel abroad amidst the increased scrutiny of post 9/11.

Over the years, numerous members of Jamaat ul-Fuqra have been convicted in US courts of such crimes as conspiracy to commit murder, firebombing, gun smuggling, and workers' compensation fraud. Others remain leading suspects in criminal cases throughout the country, including ten unsolved assassinations and seventeen fire-bombings between 1979 and 1990.

The criminal charges against the group and the criminal convictions are not things of the past. In 2001, a resident of a California compound was charged with first-degree murder in the shooting of a sheriff's deputy; another was charged with gun-smuggling' and twenty-four members of the Red House community were convicted of firearms violations.

By 2004 federal investigators uncovered evidence that linked both the DC "sniper killer" John Allen Muhammed and "Shoe Bomber" Richard Reid to the group and reports surfaced that Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl was captured and beheaded in the process of attempting to obtain an interview with Sheikh Gilani in Pakistan.

Even though Jamaat ul-Fuqra has been involved in terror attacks and sundry criminal activities, recruited thousands of members from federal and state penal systems, and appears to be operating paramilitary facilities for militant Muslims, it remains to be placed on the official US Terror Watch List. On the contrary, it continues to operate, flourish, and expand as a legitimate nonprofit, tax-deductible charity.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Everyday, American Congress for Truth (ACT)

AND FROM Jihad Watch, May 21, 2007
COMES THIS FOLLOWUP:

Islamberg not the only jihadist compound in the U.S.

A follow-up to this story. "Radical Muslim paramilitary compounds flourishing across the United States: Islamberg not the only radical Muslim compound flourishing in North America," by Judi McLeod for Canada Free Press, with thanks to WriterMom:

...Islamberg is just one of what is thought to be a half dozen radical Muslim paramilitary compounds flourishing across the United States, this one nestled in dense forest at the foothills of the Catskill Mountains on the outskirts of Hancock, New York.

Canada, home to at least one such compound, is no safe ground....

Hundreds of letters have deluged (CFP) since it published a story with pictures of Springtime in Islamberg, written by The Day of Islam author Dr. Paul Williams with the able assistance of Doug Hagmann, Bill Krayer and Michael Travis.

Many letter writers complain that local authorities are telling them they have never heard of the compound.

Islamberg is an al Fuqra house. "Fuqra has had a disturbing U.S. presence for more than 20 years." (The weekly Standard, March 18, 2002). "Today, half a dozen Fuqra residential compounds in rural hamlets across the country shelter hundreds of members, some of whom, according to intelligence sources, have been trained in the use of weapons and explosives in Pakistan."

In a world where authorities make like terrorism doesn't exist, Fuqra's founder and bossman, Sheikh Mubarik Ali Hasmi Shah Gilani, is not only alive and well -- he has a road "Sheikh Gilani Lane" named after him. This road is not in faraway Pakistan, but right in Charlotte County, Virginia.

Charlotte County is a rural farming community in Central Virginia near the North Carolina border.

Read it all.

Posted by Robert at 10:43 AM Comments (21)
Email this entry Print this entry Digg this del.icio.us

Jihad Watch, May 21, 2007

ASSIMILATION?

Is it possible to assimilate Moslems into our society without changing the society into an Islamic-dominated one?

Here's one "Moslem in America" for you:



















Sanctuarified Muslim Thanks America With a Special Salute

from
Debbie Schlussel: Welcome to D-Mecca, Sanctuary City

Assimilation?

"I know I don't have to fit in," she [Ismahan, a computer scientist in
Michigan] said. "I don't think Muslims have to assimilate. We are not treated like Americans. At work, I get up from my desk and go to pray. I thought I would face opposition from my boss. Even before I realized he didn't mind, I thought, 'I have a right to be a Muslim, and I don't have to assimilate.' "
http://rantwraith.blogspot.com/2006/08/rejectionist-generation.html
America's Muslims Aren't as Assimilated as You Think

Despite contemporary public opinion -- or perhaps because of it -- Muslim Americans consider Islam their defining characteristic, beyond any national identity. In this way, their experience in the United States resembles that of their co-religionists in Europe, where mosques are also growing, Islamic schools are being built, and practicing the faith is the center of life, particularly for the young generation. In Europe and the United States, young Muslims are
unifying around popular imams they believe understand the challenges they face in Western societies ...

America's Muslims Aren't as Assimilated as You Think

DEPORTATION

A Dream or a Reality?

It may well be the wish of many of us, especially after viewing the foregoing photo of a Moslem living in our country, that we just get rid of them. Deport them all. But is this dealing with the reality of the uncounted number of illegally-entered, visaed-but-stayed-on-after- visa-expiration "students"--from such Islamic areas as Saudi Arabia and the "Palestinian"-occupied Israeli territories--as well as Moslem green-card holders and "Moslem-American" citizens (an oxymoron)?

Not under our present State Department visa-issuing policies and the Administration climate of viewing Islam as just another "religion" and one "of peace" at that.

Would a change of Administrations bring about a climate favorable to mass deportation of the Moslem squatters in our country? Not if a Democratic Administration nor a Bush-like, Arab-favoring Republican power elite were to hold the reins of government.

What to do then? What can reasonably be expected? Under the most favorable conditions---after a horrific Islamic attack on the United States--the deportation of illegally-residing Moslems, especially Moslems with criminal records, and all Moslems engaging in or providing aid to Islamic terrorism--the technique of warfare favored by Islam ever since it was founded by the cunning desert brigand.

That leaves us with the legal Moslem "immigrant" and the Moslem holder of American citizenship.

What can be done about those?

Stay tuned, I'll think of something. Or better yet, somebody else will, and I'll find it, grab it, and post it here.

In the meantime, let's look at the s0-called "American" Moslems (or Moslem-"Americans") and what they are doing to our country:

[NOTE: 10-01-08 The following links will most probably not get you into the "Islamic Danger" blog. That blog--the "grandfather" of the ""Islamic Danger 2, 4, still, FU, etc." blogs--is closed to all but those of us who wrote posts there. I will migrate the following posts, as soon as I can spare the time, so that you CAN read them. Leslie White]

Can there be such a thing as a "Moslem-American?"

Moslems in the U.S.A.

Militant Islam in America

Classification of Moslems in America

How Moslems Are Taking Over America

Moslems Do Not Want to Integrate

The Challenge of Islam

The Logistical Problems of Deporting All Islamic enemies--aliens and citizens

"We have the choice either to expel the current threat and the people bearing it, and then to contain that threat within certain boundaries, or we can continue with business as before, as the states and elites of Europe continued to do all through the 1930s..."

The questions I want to address are simple: where do you send them and how do you get them there? This is not like Czechoslovakia or Poland expelling Germans, or Turkey expelling Greeks. Muslims cannot simply be forced across the border into ‘their’ country. First, Britain is an island. Second, no European country ‘bordering’ Britain would want 2 million angry, impoverished refugees. This would not even be like the Partition of India. The refugees can’t walk or pack onto trains for the long ride out.

We are talking about forcing people onto airplanes and flying them somewhere. Between 1.5 and 2 million people would need a lot of planes flying for a long time. They won’t just sit quietly and enjoy the in-flight movie. That’s the whole point of expelling them, remember. The flights would require a significant number of guards on board to prevent the refugees from storming the cockpit.

Excerpts from
-Rebecca Bynum, Tribalism, Culture and the Nation-State

Read it all.

PERSIANS AND ISLAM

If you think that all Iranians are united behind the enemy of the Jews and America--the disgusting little gnome Ahmadinejad--take another look at the legacy of Persia: an Indo-European civilization. Iranians (Persians) are NOT Arabs!

Whether Shi-ite or Sunni, Mohammedanism is a foreign ideology to Persians--the ancient people of Iran.

Click on
http://www.iranian.ws/cgi-bin/iran_news/exec/view.cgi/1/718 - Part One

and

http://www.iranian.ws/cgi-bin/iran_news/exec/view.cgi/1/719 - Part Two