Fjordman’s latest essay has been published at Jihad Watch. Some excerpts are below:
Inspired by Bat Ye’or’s groundbreaking work Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis, I wrote my own book Defeating Eurabia in 2008. My conclusion back then, which still stands today, was that the European Union constitutes a threat to the entire European continent and needs to be dismantled:
“The EU has accepted that the Union should be enlarged to include the Muslim Middle East and North Africa. The EU has accepted that tens of millions of immigrants from predominantly Muslim countries in northern Africa should be allowed to settle in Europe in the years ahead. This is supposedly ‘good for the economy.’ It is planning to implement sharia laws for the millions of Muslims it is inviting to settle in Europe. It has passed stronger anti-racism laws while making it clear that ‘Islamophobia’ constitutes a form of racism, and is cooperating with Islamic countries on rewriting school textbooks to provide a ‘positive’ image of Islam to European children. Finally, the EU is developing an Arrest Warrant which stipulates that those charged with serious crimes, for instance racism, can be arrested without undue interference of the nation state they happen to live in. In essence, the EU is formally surrendering an entire continent to Islam while destroying established national cultures, and is prepared to harass those who disagree with this policy. This constitutes the greatest organized betrayal in Western history, yet is hailed as a victory for ‘tolerance.’“
Those who still believe that Eurabia is a merely “conspiracy theory” should take a closer look at how European authorities handled the Swiss ban on the building of minarets, which constitute a visible symbol of Islamic supremacy.
The Council of Europe, in close cooperation with the EU, the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), the Arab League and other Islamic organizations, is working to combat “Islamophobia” in Europe by all means necessary. In February 2010, a few months after the referendum that banned minarets in Switzerland, COJEP International and EMISCO (European Muslim Initiative for Social Cohesion) with the support of the Council of Europe and the OIC launched a contest to select the most beautiful existing minaret in Europe. According to them, mosques have become a “permanent addition” to our urban landscapes that Westerners should get used to:
– – – – – – – – –
“It is however unfortunate, that lately some populist politicians and a section of media has made minarets an issue to curtail fundamental rights. This has resulted in attacks on ethnic and religious minorities and spreading of hate crimes against Muslim people in Europe. It is therefore important that the universal peaceful presence of Islam is visible and its followers are able to practice their religion openly as is the case with other religions. This photo contest is also intended to remove the misplaced fears and prejudices in European societies that Islam and Muslims undermine the Western values and cultures.”
The winners will be presented at a press conference to be held at the European Parliament on the 20th of April 2010. An exhibition of the most beautiful pictures of minarets and mosques will be held at the Council of Europe later this year. As we have seen, a minaret is a symbol of Islamic supremacy and dominance over non-Muslims. The EU Parliament will thus hail the “most beautiful” symbol of the Islamic colonization of Europe and the subjugation of the native population of an entire continent to Islamic rule. There can be no better reminder of the fact that the European Union is not just an active collaborator in the destruction of European civilization, but in some ways arguably its main engine. The only long-term solution to this problem is to permanently end Muslim immigration to all Western nations, to abolish and dismantle organizations such as the EU and the CoE and to get rid of Multiculturalism.
Read the rest at Jihad Watch.
I’ve often wondered if extremists (i.e. obediant Muslims) haven’t got us by the balls in some way, like a nuke in every city – and they’re forcing our leaders to capitulate.
It sure seems plausible when I read stuff like this.
A contest for the most beautiful minaret in Europe ?
This strikes me as rather tame and squeamish. Racism and islamophobia will not be repelled by such a feeble ploy. Surely, human rights promoters can come up with something better. Inter-faith dialogue deserves a more creative and, should I say, robust approach.
How about a contest for the most beautiful female genital mutilation in Europe ?
Think of all the possibilites. Now that’s what I would call bringing out together the best in Islam and the West !
the European Union constitutes a threat to the entire European continent and needs to be dismantled
The EU is not just a threat to Europe. Please recall that some Saudi plotters involved with the 9-11 atrocity originated out of Germany. Harboring terrorists poses a threat to all free nations.
Furthermore, as a nuclear power, France’s slow descent into Muslim demographic superiority threatens to see its nuclear arsenal fall into Islamic hands. Few more hideous outcomes can be imagined than that.
Ergo, the EU’s destructive reach extends far beyond its own shores.
The EU has accepted that tens of millions of immigrants from predominantly Muslim countries in northern Africa should be allowed to settle in Europe in the years ahead.
This only accelerates the process and magnifies any danger involved.
According to them, mosques have become a “permanent addition” to our urban landscapes that Westerners should get used to
A few major terrorist atrocities could change all that. Minarets and mosques are excellent sources of rubble and other reusable aggregate or building-related construction materials.
It is however unfortunate, that lately some populist politicians and a section of media has made minarets an issue to curtail fundamental rights.
All the while steadfastly ignoring how Islam remains without peer in its ability to “curtail fundamental rights.”
This has resulted in attacks on ethnic and religious minorities and spreading of hate crimes against Muslim people in Europe.
Again, ignoring how “attacks on ethnic and religious minorities and spreading of hate crimes” is de rigueur in all Muslim majority nations.
It is therefore important that the universal peaceful presence of Islam is visible and its followers are able to practice their religion openly as is the case with other religions.
Patently disregarding how all other world religions are not “able to practice their religion openly” in the vast majority of Islamic nations.
From the Linked Jihad Watch article: According to other, popular Islamic beliefs, bells were thought to attract evil spirits, or to keep angels away.
A surefire indicator that all Infidels should have belled windchimes outside their places of residence. Just as all who are able to should own dogs of any size, preferrably large ones, to make local Muslims ill at ease with the greatest possible frequency.
In any final analysis, as with speculation about Obama being a “closet” or “stealth” Muslim, the EU must be regarded as having a de facto agenda for destroying indigenous European culture.
It matters not whether this is the EU’s specific intent or otherwise, the upshot remains the same. Therefore, whatever the EU’s plans may be, they must be treated as such, just as Obama must be regarded as an ally of Islam and not as any sort of friend to the West. To do anything else is to facilitate both of their ghastly agendas.
Viking: I’ve often wondered if extremists (i.e. obediant Muslims) haven’t got us by the balls in some way, like a nuke in every city – and they’re forcing our leaders to capitulate.
There is no possible way that Islam has in its possession a sufficient number of nuclear devices to avoid the eventual, inevitable, negative and catastrophic outcome that most assuredly awaits it.
As Wretchard notes in his magnum opus, “The Three Conjectures“:
At this point [subsequent to a number of nuclear terrorist attacks], a United States choked with corpses could still not negotiate an end to hostilities or deter further attacks. There would be no one to call on the Red Telephone, even to surrender to. In fact, there exists no competent Islamic authority, no supreme imam who could stop a jihad on behalf of the whole Muslim world. Even if the terror chiefs could somehow be contacted in this apocalyptic scenario and persuaded to bury the hatchet, the lack of command and control imposed by the cell structure would prevent them from reining in their minions. Due to the fixity of intent, attacks would continue for as long as capability remained. Under these circumstances, any American government would eventually be compelled by public desperation to finish the exchange by entering -1 x 10^9 in the final right hand column: total retaliatory extermination.
The so-called strengths of Islamic terrorism: fanatical intent; lack of a centralized leadership; absence of a final authority and cellular structure guarantee uncontrollable escalation once the nuclear threshold is crossed. Therefore the ‘rational’ American response to the initiation of terrorist WMD attack would be all out retaliation from the outset.
James Lileks and the Pew respondents would not lose America; but like the boogeyman in Seven, Islam would take it’s soul.
[Special Emphasis] The most startling result of this analysis is that a catastrophic outcome for Islam is guaranteed whether America retaliates or not.
Even if the President decided to let all Americans die to expiate their historical guilt, why would Islamic terrorists stop after that? They would move on to Europe and Asia until finally China, Russia, Japan, India or Israel, none of them squeamish, wrote -1 x 10^9 in the final right hand column. They too would be prisoners of the same dynamic, and they too have weapons of mass destruction. [emphasis added]
Unable to alter its triumphalist doctrine nor moderate the fixity with which it pursues global jihad, Islam’s tale can only have the unhappiest of endings.
Regardless of American or European appeasement of Islam, there are too many other nuclear powers that WILL NOT TOLERATE any notion of Islamic supremacy and have far more deep seated hatreds or, simply, intact cultural survival instincts, to even consider capitulation to a global caliphate.
Thus, as the ancient proverb predicts, will Islam perish by the same sword with which it forcibly converts so many.
Here is my nomination for the most beautiful minaret: Located in Copenhagen, of course…
Shouldn’t I be able to claim asylum in the US because the EU is breaching my right to freedom of speech with the racism stuff?
Right now, I wish I was Japanese or Chinese. Europeans are sad jokes.
Well, it is not a serious suggestion of course, but I wonder if MAD (mutually assured destruction) is really a deterrant to religious fanatics desperate to enter Islamic Paradise in the same way it was to Americans and the Soviet union.
I just don’t think we are dealing with rational people, here. In theory no city with a large Muslim population should be a target for Muslim extremists – but this “human shield” has been ZERO deterrant to terrorist attacks. Islamic extremists are happy to vaporise their own in the name of Allah.
to be fair, there are an awful lot of us who don’t buy the p.c. bullshit and actually want to change this self-destruction. most europeans do not want what is happening, but our good nature is being used against us. Since WW2 we have an ideological vacuum combined with a sense of fairness and freedom that somewhat hamstrings us when it comes to immigrants and their so-called “human rights” which, ironically, we have bestowed upon them without demanding anything in return.
I live in self-imposed exile of sorts in the “new world2 because I am sick of the bullshit, but I know that is no real answer. I can tell you that European immigration to Australia, Canada and the USA has reached an all-time high.
The minaret is the perfect phallic symbol, invading the feminized Europe. The women’s vote has been a disaster.
Viking: Well, it is not a serious suggestion of course, but I wonder if MAD (mutually assured destruction) is really a deterrant to religious fanatics desperate to enter Islamic Paradise in the same way it was to Americans and the Soviet union.
Why shouldn’t it be a serious question?
Aside from the fact that America’s Democratic Party administration has formally announced it will not retaliate with nuclear weapons against biological or chemical attacks upon the USA by adherents to the NPT (Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty), that is.
Terrorism employs an asymmetrical strategy in its attacks upon the West. A functional Response-In-Kind doctrine would seem to dictate a form of reply that also uses an asymmetrical profile. Another term for this would be Massively Disproportionate Retaliation.
Islam’s fanatical component is far more obsessed with entering paradise than much of the regular Muslim population. To date, the world’s Muslim population has not had to bear the brunt of retaliation for the terrorist attacks that it sponsors through zakat and, by dint of its thundering silence, tacitly approves of.
Any functional deterrant to Islamic terrorism must involve retaliation on a scale whereby the enabling population of Muslims is introduced to privations and hardship that inspire opposition to any further pursuit of jihad. Again, to date, nothing of the sort has even remotely begun to occur.
Change will come only when sufficiently large numbers of Muslims either lose their lives or experience severe enough hardship such that it motivates them to begin purging the jihadist component of their population. Islam must be compelled to clean its own house. The West has no responsibility for combatting terrorism beyond making it exceptionally uncomfortable for any and all who do not actively oppose it.
Muslims must be taught to curse the name of Osama bin Laden.