Our Dutch correspondent H. Numan sees something more than coincidence in the timing of the latest riots in France.
An Attack on Christmas
by H. Numan
In 2005 we saw massive riots occur right after the Christmas season started in France. Two Muslim juvenile criminals tried to escape from the police after a robbery. They fled into an electricity building and got electrocuted. Not nice, agreed. But something one might expect when taking refuge in a building like that. Nor can you blame the police for it. However, Muslim society certainly did. They reacted immediately with massive violence. So much so that the authorities were not able to cope with it. And not a single word condemning the two robbers.
That might be a coincidence. True. But what do we see this year? We see massive violence occur right after the Christmas season started in France. Two Muslim juvenile criminals tried to escape from the police on a stolen motorcycle, and died in a traffic accident. Not nice, agreed. But something one might expect when driving recklessly without a helmet. One cannot blame the police for it. However, Muslim society certainly did. They reacted immediately with massive violence. So much so, that the authorities are not able to cope with it. And not a single word condemning the two thieves.
Once is a coincidence. When exactly the scenario happens twice it is not. If you think so, I have a bridge to sell you. What we see here now is a perfectly orchestrated attack on the West’s most important festival: Christmas. Why Christmas? Why not Easter? After all Easter has a far more significant meaning for Christians. Agreed, but while Easter is religiously more significant, Christmas has a much bigger impact on society as a whole . The celebrations around Easter are far less substantial than around Christmas, for example.
Look back in history: every tribe, every nation and every civilization in Europe celebrated something around the end of the year. From prehistoric times until today. Our ancestors considered the shortest day of the year to be of massive importance to their spiritual life. Celts, Germanic tribes, Romans, Franks, Vikings, Saxons — just about anybody you can think of celebrated it. The period usually starts at the end of November and lasts until the first week of the new year.
The rise of Christianity didn’t change that. It merely continued under a different name, with a different ritual. The Roman Saturnalia, for example, changed into our Christmas, and New Year’s Day became Saint Sylvester’s day. The first week of the New Year was closed now by the arrival of the wise men from the East, or Epiphany. In the 19th and 20th centuries the Christmas season became more secular and far less religious. But the festival remained essentially the same.
For Muslims the situation is very different. They never celebrated Christmas, and in the desert ‘the dark days before’ simply don’t exist. Add to this the singular view monotheists hold, Muslims in particular: any festival not theirs is per definition a heathen/infidel/pagan ritual. For Muslims anything not ordered in the Koran or hadith is a blasphemy at the very least. Over time, I have read many news items in which Muslim imams speak against such festivals. Christmas is, according to them, a pagan festival.
– – – – – – – – –
Correctly so, if you choose to go back to its very roots and ignore everything else. The same is true for Easter or any other Christian or Western festival you can think of. Many of our festivals have ancient roots, going back millennia in time.
According to these Muslim teachers, who are — and never forget it — the spokespersons of all Muslims, Christmas still is a pagan festival where idols are worshiped: father Christmas, the Christmas tree, and of course the Nativity Scene.
Do we really worship any of these symbols? According to Muslims, we certainly do. We also seem to worship animals. A bunny, to be exact. We do that during Easter. So, according to the new colonists of Europe, we are about the same as the (pagan) red Indians encountered by the Pilgrim Fathers, and need to be dealt with the same way. As there are far too many Injuns, and their bows and arrows are a good deal more dangerous, a different strategy must be applied.
This is something the West cannot understand. There seems to be a collective mindblock for it: Everything is observed from a religious point of view, and a very strict point at that, in the Muslim world. Not just in Saudi Arabia or Iran, but every Muslim nation on earth. Far worse: the adherents to the faith accept it without question.
This goes much further than the strictest form of Marxism. (Where do you think Marx found this idea?) “Anything that promotes the cause of Marxism is good, anything that hinders it, is bad.” This principle has been questioned many times in Marxism, but rarely in Mohammedanism. If the question arose, the issue was always settled in favor of the hardliners. The questioners usually were dispatched to Allah to discuss this in person with him.
Liberalism and democracy are blasphemous words to a devout Muslim, even more offensive to Muslims than they were to hard-line party hacks during the height of the Cold War. One uses liberals and democrats to achieve one’s goals. Then, just as now. Then it was a worldwide worker’s paradise, now a world containing only Muslims.
It is extremely important to remember this. I think this is the key why the West at the moment is puzzled about how to respond to Mohammedanism. It showed the same puzzled reaction to Communism in the bad old days of the cold war. We should have dialog. We should understand their point of view. We should compromise, and everything would be okay.
Those who questioned this were seen as warmongers, hardliners or worse. Today the West faces a much tougher opponent than ever before. It is therefore vitally important to realize Muslims observe everything according to the Koran, and reject most that is not strictly permitted in it. Faith rules the lives of all Muslims, and there is very little else. Anything democratic, if you happen to find it in a Muslim society, is purely coincidental.
Now I think the situation becomes a bit more clear. Christmas is the key festival of the West. Muslims are known for head-on attacks. They have always preferred that throughout history. One might opt for more subtle actions, but why on earth bother?
The war against Christmas has been going on for more than two years and very few people seem to realize it. Why use a surgeon’s knife if you can stun them with a sledgehammer? Subtlety will be applied when they meet resistance, and they haven’t so far. Of course this sledgehammer approach is only temporary. The French, and Europe, will come to understand soon enough Muslims don’t like Christmas. Once the French understand that, they will be sensible enough to self-censor the Christmas season down to… nothing. Once the Christmas season is censored away, any other festival is a walkover.
There is a very good reason why Al Qaeda doesn’t do bombings in Europe anymore: they don’t need to. A strategic Al Qaeda document leaked out clearly stated that bombing Europe was no longer necessary, nor desired, after the attacks on London and Madrid. Both governments immediately surrendered. Any more brutal bombings would be counterproductive for the Jihad. You can say a lot of nasty things about Muslims or Al Qaeda, but being lousy strategists isn’t one of them.
Rest assured that next year’s Christmas might very well be a very quiet affair, strictly within the family. “So as not to offend our Muslims”. If that happens, we have lost the war. A war that most of us don’t even realize is going on right now.