Monday, April 28, 2008

State Department Funding ISNA's* Propagation Of Islam

Bush Administration Moves To Legitimize The Muslim Brotherhood?
*Islamic Society of North America [ISNA, an arm of the Muslim Brotherhood and named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the ongoing Holy Land Foundation terror funding prosecution, whose mission statement is "Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Qur'an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope"]

Sunday, April 27, 2008

takbeer (تَكْبِير)

is the name they give to
Allāhu Akbar الله أكبر.
which means, "Allah is [the] greatest"
Listen to them as they shout it
And a thought comes to us and we--some of us--silently invoke
אם ירצה השם
or "If God wishes it" some think
And we wait and see whether this is so . . .
"Jihadist Tries To Kill Infidels" or
"How 2 hook up with 72 virgins"
Also, if you have not seen it yet, be sure to look at When You Hear Someone Shout, "Allahu Akbar!" (what should you do?)

a couple of good ones there; check 'em out.

Saturday, April 26, 2008

Saturday, April 19, 2008

future events in the UK:

" . . . the European struggle is the most important of our time. The fate of the entire West hinges on what happens in Europe over the next two decades."
--Baron Bodissey
"Gates of Vienna"

Friday, April 18, 2008

Thursday, April 17, 2008


What Foreign Fighter Data Reveals About the Future of Terrorism
by Clinton Watts

-He is a young man who likely comes from a handful of cities in North Africa and the Middle East—what I call flashpoint cities. He is probably from a country that has a high infant mortality rate, a high unemployment rate, and few civil liberties.

-The mujahid* was not mobilized by Internet content or a centralized recruiting organization but instead by a returning foreign fighter or a local religious leader. The returning fighter or religiousl eader told him how to travel to a country where he could engage in combat. The mujahid, and probably some friends, traveled by a commercial plane or ground transportation to a country that neighbors theconflict area and then paid a local smuggler to get him in.

-The mujahid’s financial assets and spending habits vary between countries. If he is Saudi, he will contribute significantly more money to the fight. Meanwhile, a Moroccan will give his life as a suicide bomber but does not have much cash to spare. Regardless of location, the mujahid is also likely unemployed or a student (which usually amounts to the same thing) or works as a common laborer. He is not necessarily impoverished but has time on his hands and a lack of purpose, making him more susceptible to radicalization and giving him enough free time to travel in support of jihad. If he has experience fighting, he will elect to fight; if not, he will elect to be a suicide bomber.

In addition to informing the above profile of al-Qa’ida’s foot soldiers, the data suggests alternative techniques for countering the organization and its foreign fighter recruits . . .

th[e] study does not analyze the threat of terrorism from South Asia. Pakistan still remains the headquarters of al-Qa’ida, and the diversity of Pakistani militant groups pose a serious foreign fighter threat as well, evidenced by attacks in the United Kingdom and elsewhere. However, the records from Sinjar and Guantanamo Bay do not support analysis of this phenomenon.

Second, in addition to detainee data available from Guantanamo, this study is based on my own analysis of the Sinjar records** released in December 2007. A recent Combating Terrorism Center study identified 595 discrete entries from the translated Sinjar records, whereas I found only 563 unique fighter records stating a country of origin outside of Iraq . . .
--Clinton Watts
"Beyond Iraq and Afghanistan
What Foreign Fighter Data Reveals About the Future of Terrorism"
Small Wars Journal
* mujahid - a Muslim engaged in what he considers to be a jihad
mujahadeen, mujahadein, mujahadin, mujahedeen, mujahedin, mujahideen, mujahidin - a military force of Muslim guerilla warriors engaged in a jihad; "some call the mujahidin international warriors but others just call them terrorists"
Moslem, Muslim - a believer in or follower of Islam

**NOTE: Sinjar records link thanks to

Wednesday, April 16, 2008


" . . . without deceit and sword, Islam would have been stillborn. An infinitesimal fraction of the one billion people subservient to Islam today actually chose their fate. In Mecca, fourteen hundred years ago, after a decade of preaching, as few as fifty men chose to follow Muhammad. But that all changed in Medina. There, according to the Qur'an and Hadith, Muhammad became a political tyrant, a terrorist, and a thief. His willingness to lead seventy-five armed raids against defenseless civilians swelled his ranks as swiftly as the spoils of "war" filled his pockets. "

"Despite what you've heard in the media, there is but one Islam, a singular correct view of Muhammad, Allah, and Jihad. It is the one printed in the Qur'an and Hadith. There is no independent record of Muhammad in history from which a variant view may be drawn. The Hadith and Qur'an are the sole repository of information on this man, his times, means, and mission. The Muhammad of Islam, the god of Islam, and the religion of Islam must be as these sources present them.

"Lastly, Islam has no alibi, no reason to cry, "Unfair." The Qur'an condemns all non-Muslims - Christians and Jews as well as those who worship many gods and no gods. It is an equal opportunity hater. Its attitude toward unbelieving infidels is overwhelmingly hostile. A cursory reading of the first ten surahs is sufficient to prove that the relatively few nice verses were contradicted and replaced, "abrogated" in Muslim parlance, by a staggering number of nasty ones. In fact, the Qur'an was written to justify some of the most ungodly behavior the world has ever known."

"Reason and Faith"

Pope Benedict XVI knows the unreason of Islam well. In his famous address at Regensburg, which elicited howls of rage across the Islamic world, he addressed reason, Islam, and the nature of God:


The decisive statement in this argument against violent conversion is this: not to act in accordance with reason is contrary to God's nature. The editor, Theodore Khoury, observes: For the emperor, as a Byzantine shaped by Greek philosophy, this statement is self-evident. But for Muslim teaching, God is absolutely transcendent. His will is not bound up with any of our categories, even that of rationality. Here Khoury quotes a work of the noted French Islamist R. Arnaldez, who points out that Ibn Hazm went so far as to state that God is not bound even by his own word, and that nothing would oblige him to reveal the truth to us. Were it God's will, we would even have to practise idolatry.

At this point, as far as understanding of God and thus the concrete practice of religion is concerned, we are faced with an unavoidable dilemma. Is the conviction that acting unreasonably contradicts God's nature merely a Greek idea, or is it always and intrinsically true? I believe that here we can see the profound harmony between what is Greek in the best sense of the word and the biblical understanding of faith in God. Modifying the first verse of the Book of Genesis, the first verse of the whole Bible, John began the prologue of his Gospel with the words: "In the beginning was the λόγος". This is the very word used by the emperor: God acts, σὺν λόγω, with logos. Logos means both reason and word - a reason which is creative and capable of self-communication, precisely as reason. John thus spoke the final word on the biblical concept of God, and in this word all the often toilsome and tortuous threads of biblical faith find their culmination and synthesis. In the beginning was the logos, and the logos is God, says the Evangelist. The encounter between the Biblical message and Greek thought did not happen by chance. The vision of Saint Paul, who saw the roads to Asia barred and in a dream saw a Macedonian man plead with him: "Come over to Macedonia and help us!" (cf. Acts 16:6-10) - this vision can be interpreted as a "distillation" of the intrinsic necessity of a rapprochement between Biblical faith and Greek inquiry.

In point of fact, this rapprochement had been going on for some time. The mysterious name of God, revealed from the burning bush, a name which separates this God from all other divinities with their many names and simply declares "I am", already presents a challenge to the notion of myth, to which Socrates' attempt to vanquish and transcend myth stands in close analogy. Within the Old Testament, the process which started at the burning bush came to new maturity at the time of the Exile, when the God of Israel, an Israel now deprived of its land and worship, was proclaimed as the God of heaven and earth and described in a simple formula which echoes the words uttered at the burning bush: "I am". This new understanding of God is accompanied by a kind of enlightenment, which finds stark expression in the mockery of gods who are merely the work of human hands (cf. Ps 115). Thus, despite the bitter conflict with those Hellenistic rulers who sought to accommodate it forcibly to the customs and idolatrous cult of the Greeks, biblical faith, in the Hellenistic period, encountered the best of Greek thought at a deep level, resulting in a mutual enrichment evident especially in the later wisdom literature. Today we know that the Greek translation of the Old Testament produced at Alexandria - the Septuagint - is more than a simple (and in that sense really less than satisfactory) translation of the Hebrew text: it is an independent textual witness and a distinct and important step in the history of revelation, one which brought about this encounter in a way that was decisive for the birth and spread of Christianity. A profound encounter of faith and reason is taking place here, an encounter between genuine enlightenment and religion. From the very heart of Christian faith and, at the same time, the heart of Greek thought now joined to faith, Manuel II was able to say: Not to act "with logos" is contrary to God's nature.

[end of quote]

more on this at . . .

Extreme Euphemism Alert 2008

and . . .



Read the whole Pope Benedict XVI speech that so upset the Islamic world (so easily upset) at
© Copyright 2006 - Libreria Editrice Vaticana

Tuesday, April 15, 2008


Why he (the self-dubbed "Prophet") wouldn't have any of it--couldn't handle it, because the pieced-together making-no-sense-when-taken-as-a-whole, disjointed, recorded babblings of a sometimes lucid, sometimes looney Arab of no particular merit, until he stumbled onto a plan--to justify rape, robbery, and murder for all who believed he was hearing a god speaking to him and making him the supreme

Why this rage when critiqued, mocked, or insulted?

because the only answer there is when questioned, the only answer in the Mohammed's ghost's words possible is "Because I said so."

Spain under Moslem rule
in the GoldenAge when
Christians and Mohammedans all got along
Pre-Reconquista--Moorish Spain
St Perfectus
18 April 850 A.D.

The first martyr of this age was the aptly-named priest Perfectus, who served at the basilica of St Acisclus, just outside the city walls of Cordoba. One day on his way to market he was stopped by a group of Muslims. Seeing that he was a priest, they asked him to explain his faith and to share with them his opinions about Christ and Muhammad. Fearing that he would only provoke his audience, Fr Perfectus declined. But when the Muslims swore to protect him, he proceeded, in Arabic, to denounce Muhammad as one of the false prophets foretold by Christ and as a moral reprobate who had seduced the wife of his kinsman.

Though angered, the Muslims respected their oaths and let Fr Perfectus go on his way. But a few days later the priest ran into some of the same group, who no longer felt constrained by their earlier promise. Seizing him, they took him before the magistrate and testified that he had disparaged Muhammad. As they led him to prison to wait out Ramadan, he realized that his fate was sealed and he repeat his denunciation of Islam. On Easter Sunday, 18 April 850, Fr Perfectus was beheaded before the crowds that had gathered to celebrate the end of their fast.
Also, see

Is It Wrong To Use Moslems . . . to fight Moslems?

El Cid

. . . the Prophet needed a proxy disguised as god who would echo precisely, though in a pompous language, the personal proclivities of the Prophet in every situation, domestic as well as public, which the Prophet had to face. This conclusion is confirmed by a reading of the Quran in a chronological order**, side by side with the orthodox biographies of the Prophet. The close correspondence between what the Prophet was planning or pining for in his normal moments, and what was revealed to him in a state of wahy***that followed soon after, is quite striking. The chronological confusion in the compilation of the Quran has helped a good deal to hide this correspondence.
*in this own image!


***also wahi (italics mine, lw)
wahi or Quranic trance
"Wahi: the Supernatural Basis of Islam"
Hamas MP and Cleric Yunis Al-Astal in a Friday Sermon: We Will Conquer Rome, and from There Continue to Conquer the Two Americas and Eastern Europe


Sunday, April 13, 2008


Fitzgerald: Appease Saudi Arabia?

Fitzgerald: Boycott? An excellent idea

Fitzgerald: Islam's credibility and the Pentagon

Saturday, April 12, 2008


(Main article)from ACT for America

Editorial comment by Leslie White:

The point to consider here is not so much the use of Scouts to "get out the Moslem vote," which this article emphasizes, as it is the the politico-demographic front being opened by the jihadist who are not only attacking us from without but from within. Thanks to an ignorant and treasonous immigration policy* which encourages Moslems to settle in the United States, one of the most violent and jihad-oriented Islamic bodies has gotten its clawed paws involved in internal American politics.

The so innocent-sounding "Muslim American Society," appearing to be just another "American" organization, is really the instrument of--guess whom?

"The Muslim American Society was founded in 1993 by the members of the Muslim Brotherhood, an Egyptian-rooted organization that aims to reestablish the Caliphate, a global state governed by Islamic law."

[Be sure to read the Appendix of this post: it is all about the Muslim Brotherhood]

So, each time that you read "Muslim American Society (MAS) in the following piece, mentally substitute "Muslim Brotherhood" to get the full impact of what is happening.

Read on, and be concerned!

Muslim Scouts Political Program Raises Eyebrows
by Linda Keay IPT News

Seeking to flip a Republican Senate seat, the Muslim American Society used Boy and Girl Scout troops last year as part of a massive get-out-the-vote campaign targeting Muslim voters in Virginia and elsewhere.

National leaders at the Boy and Girl Scouts of America say they've never heard of using Scout troops in such political activity and it violates Scout policy. They promised to look into the MAS program.

MAS Executive Director Mahdi Bray isn't keeping the fact that he tapped Scouts to run phone banks a secret. In fact, he's bragging about it. And while he claims the calls were non-partisan, he also is comfortable saying "Democrats would be a better choice" for his constituency.

In Virginia, incumbent George Allen was struggling to hold onto his Senate seat against former Navy Secretary Jim Webb. "We delivered 80 percent of the eligible voting Muslims to the polls," Bray said in July at an Islamic Circle of North America-Muslim American Society convention in Hartford, Conn. "48,000 Muslims voted in Virginia. 93 percent of them voted for Webb, seven percent voted for Allen. Webb won by a slim margin of 9,000 votes. Now I don't care how you slice it, dice it and I don't care whether you are a mathematician or not, you can figure this out, that if 48,000 Muslims voted and 90 percent of them voted for the successful candidate, then certainly, and he only won by a 9,000 vote margin – we made a difference."

Those numbers come from a study by a MAS official. While they were widely reported after Bray touted the study, these numbers have never been independently confirmed. Independent electoral consultants have expressed doubts about their reliability.

The Muslim American Society was founded in 1993 by the members of the Muslim Brotherhood, an Egyptian-rooted organization that aims to reestablish the Caliphate, a global state governed by Islamic law.

Bray, its leader, has called the war on terror "a war on Islam" and at a 2000 rally, gestured enthusiastically in support of Hizballah and Hamas. In addition, he has defended Hizballah on his Washington, D.C. area radio show.

Bray openly described the scouting program last November in a release posted on the MAS website. "MAS Dialing for Muslim Votes" described how the organization was using a Muslim Voters Database to target calls nationally and encouraged people to vote on November 7, 2006.

"The MAS CEE (MAS Center for Electoral Empowerment) phone banks are being operated by MAS Youth, chapter members and volunteers. Even MAS Boy and Girl Scout Troops are making calls," the release said.

"Through our MAS Youth department, Boys and Girls Scout Troops, we are training an upcoming generation that will be spiritually grounded and political (sic) savvy."

That last statement appeared to rankle Boy Scout of America Scout Executive Alan Lambert, who said he's never heard of Scouts participating in phone banks before. Although he believes learning civic responsibility is an integral aspect of Scouting, he doesn't like people taking advantage of children.

"We would expect that no organization would use children to play out their political desires," Lambert said. "From my perspective…we would sever our relationship with anyone who uses children to advance political agendas."

"If it's going on and it's inappropriate, we'll stop it tomorrow," he added.
MAS claimed these were national efforts, with MAS Scouts performing similar work in other states, including Tennessee. On Election Day, a MAS release said its troops in Nashville "ran two campaigns of calling on Muslims in Tennessee to go and vote for today's elections."

They even posted pictures of the uniformed kids at work.

"The first campaign was on Sunday Nov. 5th, 2006 and the second was on Monday Nov. 6th, 2006. The Scouts used scripts and phone lists that were provided by MAS National in their call center campaign," the Election Day release said.

Girl Scouts of the USA's national office was in agreement with the Boy Scouts. Spokeswoman Megan Neuffer, said, "They are not allowed to participate directly or indirectly in phone calls or anything like that in any political campaign." That includes generic get-out-the-vote non-partisan calls, said Neuffer.

MAS is headquartered in Alexandria, Virginia. Girl Scouts from there and in Washington, D.C. are under the purview of the Girl Scout Council of the Nation's Capital. That office's Manager for Program Services, Brigid Howe, said any troop activities must follow Scout rules. That includes those splinter groups such as Muslim Scouts, or what Bray calls "MAS Scouts."

"I have not heard about anything like this," she said. Her reaction was similar to the national office's. It is not allowed, she said.

But Mary Layton, public relations director at the Girl Scout Council of the Nation's Capital saw no problem. "Phone activity in and of itself is not off limits as long as it's part of a generic ‘get out the vote' campaign," she said, "and not part of a partisan effort, including the phone bank component would not be off limits."

Layton pointed to things such as handing out League of Women Voter pamphlets and organizing mock elections, activities described by the Patriot's Trail Girl Scout Council (in Massachusetts). But in fact, phone banks aren't part of the ‘I Promised A Girl Scout I'd Vote' patch program.

Michelle Tompkins, a spokeswoman at Girl Scouts of the USA New York headquarters disagreed with Layton's position, saying, "It's likely that it would be against the rules for kids to be involved in any kind of phone bank situation." When in doubt, "it's a pretty good idea" to go with the national office as authority for such a question, Tompkins said.

Scouts have even declined requests to hand out pamphlets, said Jim Waters, Assistant Scout Executive with New York's Hudson Valley Council of Boy Scouts of America. There are events in which Scouts raise the American flag at things like political conventions, but it's performed as a civic duty, not in efforts to elect particular people.

When such requests come in, Lambert said he has to discern between faith groups, "and an organization that may be using kids to advance their political agenda." A good unit leader who doesn't know about these things, he said, would call for clarification.

"We don't publish policies on every particular instance and I'm probably not going to find anything I could give you that says, ‘You cannot participate in making phone calls for organizations like this.' What we do is we encourage leaders and adults to be reasonable and not put kids in situations that could be misconstrued."

Lambert, Neuffer and Howe said no permission or advice was requested from the national scouting organizations before the political activity took place.

After the elections, the MAS Center for Electoral Empowerment publicized the impact the ‘Muslim Voter Mobilization Campaign' had in the Virginia Senate race. A surge in Muslim voters, who traditionally vote for Democrats, swung the race to challenger James Webb, MAS claims.
Mahdi Bray has claimed at times that these efforts are non-partisan, but at other times he's stated political preferences.

"There's nothing wrong with having kids, nine, ten years old on the phones, like we did for our last youth and our last Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts making phone calls and saying, ‘Go to the polls and vote,'" he said at the July convention. "There's nothing wrong with having young people, 13 and 14 years old to go from place to place to pass out canvassing information."

While MAS affiliated Boy and Girl Scout troops nationally worked political phone banks, he emphasized the Virginia effort, where he said scripts read in part, "I can't vote, but my future can be decided by your vote. You vote."

He claimed the effort was non-partisan and said Muslims need to be flexible. But: "What I'm saying is that we realize, based on the analysis that the Muslims, the taskforce had come up with, that indeed that it would be better in terms of civil rights – who will be chairing certain important committees that raises civil liberties and like that, that in this case – the Democrats would be a better choice."

There doesn't seem to be any legal issue involved. But Rosanna Bencoach, Policy Manager for the Virginia State Board of Elections, said it amounts to "using them. He [Bray] was using the children."

Bencoach says she volunteered in politics when she was young, but it was as an individual, not through a group, although she's also a former Girl Scout. She said, "Girl Scouting and the political volunteerism were totally separate."

"I wish you didn't have to find these things. I wish these things weren't happening," Bencoach said. "But I guess I'm too much of an idealist."

In getting young people to become politically active, Bray added, "In the years to come, you ain't seen nothing yet."

"I'm a strong advocate for young people being groomed to be civically involved so that they can run the office. They have a legacy and they have the right to lead America. But they have to be groomed for it. And you prepare them for the political process."

Lambert, on the other hand, says the Scout troops aren't the place for such grooming. "I'm more concerned about the judgment of the adults that are serving as the leaders and role models of these kids. Whether or not they understand, we're not going to be placed in a position to advance any particular political agenda – we won't allow them to place us in that position."

[emphasis in red, mine. lw]

AND from Debbie Schlussel:
. . . your "counterterrorism" Prez, George W. Bush, has decided to DOUBLE the number of Saudi student visas to America. 15,000 students who do dry runs for terrorist attacks on children's school buses in Tampa, keep, rape, and torture slaves in Colorado, and other assorted lovely forms of behavior on our soil, is simply not enough. We must have more of them . . . 30,000. More who can skip out of school and disappear into the great American abyss, never to be pursued or found by ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcment).
Oh, and we have to make it easier for Saudi businessmen to get here, too. No prob that 15 Saudi "businessmen" had some interesting biz here in September of 2001 and easily got here on the same types of visas that now need "simplifying":
US Ambassador Ford Fraker said in Sakaka that his country aims to double the number of student visas issued to Saudis.
from . . . the Student Visa Overstay Problem Has Been Solved [yeah, sure, and there are no Moslems in Mecca]

ACT for America P.O. Box 6884 Virginia Beach, VA 23456


When Anwar-as-Sadat signed the peace agreement with Israel in 1979; four assassins from the Muslim Brotherhood assassinated him in September, 1981.

"Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Qur'an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope."—Muslim Brotherhood

“During the Muslim Brothers' seventy-plus years of existence, there have been cycles of growth, followed by divisions into factions, including clandestine financial networks, and violent jihad groups, such as al-Jihad and al-Gama'at al-Islamiyya in Egypt, HAMAS in Palestine and mujahideen and Al-Qaida groups in Afghanistan.”

The mainstream American media continues to indulge in the fantasy that “radical Islam” can be reformed by everybody realizing that we are at war with this minority of devils. They are Islam revisionists because they think all the “bad stuff” in the Quran was inserted there after Muhammad’s death. Naturally, they are vague on this point, as to precisely which suras were ex-post.

Presently, fanatical Islam is lashing out with mad fury before its own final demise. The “infidel” world has been complicit in the surge of Islamism through its mistakes, complacency, and greed.

What the Muslim Brotherhood means for the U.S

"The process of settlement [of Islam in the United States] is a 'Civilization-Jihadist' process with all the word means. The Ikhwan [Muslim Brotherhood] must understand that all their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and 'sabotaging' their miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim's destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is no escape from that destiny except for those who choose to slack."
--the North American operation of the extremist Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwan)


Theocracy on the 100 Year Plan-
America has its own "Islamic fascists" right here at home.

Salafism and Qutbism

Hassan al-Banna, the Egyptian founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, is said to have been influenced by the Wahhabis, but was a known Sufi. The Muslim Brotherhood also claimed to be purifying and restoring original Islam, but its goal wasn't to call to Tawheed (Islamic Monotheism), but rather to amass Muslims of different beliefs into its group. When the Muslim Brotherhood was banned in various Middle Eastern countries, Saudi Arabia gave refuge to Brotherhood exiles, who in turn influenced modern-day holy warriors such as Osama bin Laden. This proved to be a horrible mistake later on, though, and Salafis in Saudi Arabia now reject the Muslim Brotherhood. Most Wahhabis, or Salafis, rejected what they call Qutbism, as a deviation from true Salafism.

CAIR and the other stalking horses for the Muslim Brotherhood and radical Salafists want to create an Islamic nation here. There is no middle ground.

Friday, April 11, 2008


Well, You should Be!

Look and Listen!

Thursday, April 10, 2008


. . . TO US

"In working to understand the mindset of the Islamist, I have spent countless hours reading numerous books and hundreds and hundreds of essays, commentaries and interviews. Along the way one thing has become very, very clear to me: many, perhaps most, of our elected representatives and government officials do not understand, or do not want to understand, the worldview of the Islamist."

--Guy Rodgers, Executive Director, ACT for America

Before joining the “ACT team” as Executive Director, I spent nearly 25 years in the political and grassroots organization arenas. During that time I was a political consultant to nearly 50 campaigns and worked on five different presidential campaigns. As a strategist, one of my top objectives was to grasp how the political opposition thought.
--Guy Rodgers, Executive Director, ACT for America , "A MUST-READ ON POLITICAL ISLAM"‏

Mohammed killed every single intellectual or artist who opposed him. [emphasis added]. It was fear that drove the vast majority of the media not to reprint the Mohammed cartoons, not some imagined sensitivity. Fear is a fabulous basis for ignorance, but that is not enough to explain it all. What accounts for the almost psychotic aversion to knowledge about Islam? Beyond fear is the realization that political Islam is profoundly foreign to us.

Blacks don’t want to face the fact that it was a Muslim who rounded up their ancestors in Africa to wholesale to the white slave trader. The Arab is the true master of the African. Blacks can’t accept the common bond they share with whites: that both Europeans and Africans were slaves under Islam. Blacks like to imagine Islam is their counterweight to white power, not that Islam has ruled them for 1400 years.
The Study of Political Islam


. . . TO US

"All of Western logic is based upon the law of contradiction—if two things contradict, then at least one of them is false. But Islamic logic is dualistic; two things can contradict each other and both are true."
--Bill Warner, director of the Center for the Study of Political Islam

The Study of Political Islam
By Jamie Glazov
Monday, February 05, 2007

. . . dualism is the foundation and key to understanding Islam. Everything about Islam comes in twos starting with its foundational declaration: (1) there is no god but Allah and (2) Mohammed is His prophet. Therefore, Islam is Allah (Koran) and the Sunna (words and deeds of Mohammed found in the Sira and Hadith).

Our first clue about the dualism is in the Koran, which is actually two books, the Koran of Mecca (early) and the Koran of Medina (later). The insight into the logic of the Koran comes from the large numbers of contradictions in it. On the surface, Islam resolves these contradictions by resorting to “abrogation”. This means that the verse written later supersedes the earlier verse. But in fact, since the Koran is considered by Muslims to be the perfect word of Allah, both verses are sacred and true. The later verse is “better,” but the earlier verse cannot be wrong since Allah is perfect. This is the foundation of dualism. Both verses are “right.” Both sides of the contradiction are true in dualistic logic. The circumstances govern which verse is used.

[He then goes on to give] . . . an example:

(Koran of Mecca) 73:10: Listen to what they [unbelievers] say with patience, and leave them with dignity.

From tolerance we move to the ultimate intolerance, not even the Lord of the Universe can stand the unbelievers:

(Koran of Medina) 8:12: Then your Lord spoke to His angels and said, “I will be with you. Give strength to the believers. I will send terror into the unbelievers’ hearts, cut off their heads and even the tips of their fingers!”

All of Western logic is based upon the law of contradiction—if two things contradict, then at least one of them is false. But Islamic logic is dualistic; two things can contradict each other and both are true.


The Center for the Study of Political Islam [CSPI] is a group of scholars who are devoted to the scientific study of the foundational texts of Islam—Koran, Sira (life of Mohammed) and Hadith (traditions of Mohammed). There are two areas to study in Islam, its doctrine and history, or as CSPI sees it—the theory and its results. We study the history to see the practical or experimental results of the doctrine.

COMMENT--from Isabella the crusader

The thing that really blew my mind was the concept that in the west if two views contradict each other, one of them has to be false, which makes sense, but in Islam, if two views contradict each other then they can be reconciled. Huh?

Talk about newspeak.

I like things that are logical and Islam isn't. But then if one's political system's enforcement of belief in it's doctrine depends on what way the wind is blowing on any particular day, or the hormone level of the reigning psycho in charge, then it makes sense that if I say up is down and then I say up is up, it is up, especially if I'm willing to cut off your head to get you to believe me. So is Islam's contradictory doctrine reconcilable or does it not matter because Moslems are willing to kill you to get you to agree with them, whether it's true or not? I guess a knife on your throat solves a lot of disagreements.

Posted by: Isabellathecrusader

Back to the FrontPageMagazine article . . .

Another part of [our] aversion is the realization that there is no compromise with dualistic ethics. There is no halfway place between unitary ethics and dualistic ethics. If you are in a business deal with someone who is a liar and a cheat, there is no way to avoid getting cheated. No matter how nice you are to a con man, he will take advantage of you. There is no compromise with dualistic ethics. In short, Islamic politics, ethics and logic cannot be part of our civilization. Islam does not assimilate, it dominates. There is never any “getting along” with Islam. Its demands never cease and the demands must be met on Islam’s terms: submission.

. . . Islam put over a million Europeans into slavery. Since Muslims can’t be enslaved, it was a white Christian who was the Turkish sultan’s sex slave.

Jews don’t want to acknowledge the history of political Islam, because they were dhimmis, second class citizens or semi-slaves, just like the Christians. Jews like to recall how they were advisors and physicians to powerful Muslims, but no matter what the Jew did or what position he held, he was still a dhimmi.

Why should a Hindu want to recall the shame of slavery and the destruction of their temples and cities? After Hindu craftsmen built the Taj Mahal, the Muslim ruler had their right hands cut off so that they could not build anything as beautiful for anyone else.

Blacks don’t want to face the fact that it was a Muslim who rounded up their ancestors in Africa to wholesale to the white slave trader. The Arab is the true master of the African. Blacks can’t accept the common bond they share with whites: that both Europeans and Africans were slaves under Islam. Blacks like to imagine Islam is their counterweight to white power, not that Islam has ruled them for 1400 years.

At least 75% of the Sira (life of Mohammed) is about jihad. About 67% of the Koran written in Mecca is about the unbelievers, or politics. Of the Koran of Medina, 51% is devoted to the unbelievers. About 20% of Bukhari’s Hadith is about jihad and politics. Religion is the smallest part of Islamic foundational texts.

Political Islam’s most famous duality is the division of the world into believers, dar al Islam, and unbelievers, dar al harb.

Mohammed preached his religion for 13 years and garnered only 150 followers. But when he turned to politics and war, in 10 years time he became the first ruler of Arabia by averaging an event of violence every 7 weeks for 9 years. His success did not come as a religious leader, but as a political leader.

In short, political Islam defines how the unbelievers are to be dealt with and treated.

Read the whole thing at

The Study of Political Islam

Read the full article at

and be sure to visit

the Center for the Study of Political Islam

urbanadder22 said...
Isabellathecrusader,Thank you so much for posting the frontpage article: "The Study of Political Islam." is the best explanation of the incompatibility of the Islamic world with the rest of the world that I have ever read. There never has been, and there is not now, any possibility of us co-existing with the Islamic world.One or the other--the Islamic world or our world--will have to win this struggle to the death. This is the only way to end hostilities and allow for one of two types of "peace." The difference is that if we win, Islam beaten back to the impotence from which it emerged, its population decimated, there will be an uneasy peace--with us ever vigilant that Islam does not rise again. If Islam wins, then there will be "peace," for us that of the grave or as subhuman dhimmis or the unacceptable conversion to this irrational ideology based on the confused babbling of a severely impaired personality. Posted by: unicorns62000 at February 13, 2007 2:18 PM at
10:34 AM

Monday, April 7, 2008

America's First anti-Jihadist Comic Book Hero: Matamoros
April 5, 2008
comment by Jerry Gordon

don't know how I missed this one, last month, but this is a corker. Here is America's first anti-Jihadist comic book developed by Darius La Monica being interviewed by Jamie Glazov, editor of FrontPageMagazine.

The title Matamoros, as La Monica explains, is derived from a revered Spanish Saint, Santiago de Matamoros, Saint James the Moor Slayer.
La Monica explains the comic book hero and plot:

"Matamoros" follows an American NCO, Charles Sobietti, who is wounded in the war, undergoes an experimental medical procedure to recover, returns home to New York to recuperate and then discovers a radical Islamic terror cell in Queens. We put Sobietti in New York because radical Islam has been there for quite a while. The blind sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman reached New York mosques in 1990 and currently a radical group called the Islamic Thinkers Society is located in Queens. This group is believed to be an offshoot of the UK's al Mahajiroun, the radical group that is now banned by the British government. And of course we all know what radical Islam did to New York in 2001.

They're completing missing the point of the title, which is to show that we've got to get inside the heads of today's jihadists to determine their motivation for attempting to restart a global jihad. These creeps are already talking about the "tragedy of Andalusia (Muslim Spain)" and how they want it back. And they're not basing these threats on some "root cause" of poverty - they're basing it on their notion that they have a religious duty to re-conquer any areas that once were held by the Caliphate. This is the same basis for their desire to conquer Israel and the people in Spain who voted Jose Aznar out of office had better realize that if Israel falls to radical Islam, Spain is going to be the next country in the jihadists' crosshairs.

Looks like La Monica, Matamoros and Sgt. Sobietti should be on the ACT [YOUR]reading list, don't you?
By Jamie

(Read this Article)


About Matamoros

Chuck Sobietti was a seventeen-year veteran of the U.S. military. He’d seen it all - Gulf War I, Somalia, Bosnia, Afghanistan - but nothing in his experience could prepare him for one fateful day in Iraq and its aftermath.

Part political thriller, part war story, and part “classic” action comic book, Matamoros follows one of America’s heroes in the “Long War” - an ordinary guy who discovers that only extraordinary situations exist when the enemy is a protean entity which refuses to adhere to the laws of war or the laws of civilized nations.

Written by Sleet and Darius LaMonica, and illustrated by John Cox of the Cox & Forkum political cartoon team, Matamoros is the first comic book focusing on the U.S. military’s fight against radical Islamists.

Friday, April 4, 2008

The European Union and the Islamization of Europe


I've suggested in the past that the EU is the principal motor behind the Islamization of Europe, and that the entire organization needs to be dismantled; otherwise nothing substantial can ever be done about the Muslim invasion.

As Bat Ye'or demonstrates in her book Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis, senior EU leaders have actively been working for years to merge Europe with the Arab world. They are now feeling confident enough to say this openly. The British Foreign Minister David Miliband in November 2007 stated that the European Union should work towards including Middle Eastern and North African countries, as this would "extend stability." He also said that the EU must "keep our promises to Turkey" regarding EU membership.

The EU involves the free movement of people across borders. If it expands to the Middle East, hundreds of millions of Muslims will have free access to Germany, Italy, France, Britain, Sweden, the Czech Republic and Austria. If Turkey becomes a member, it means that Greeks, Bulgarians and others who have fought against oppression by Ottoman Turks for centuries will be flooded with Muslims from a rapidly re-Islamizing Turkey. The same goes for Poles, Hungarians, Romanians and others who fought against Muslims for centuries.

The EU's Justice and Security Commissioner Franco Frattini states that Europe must relax its immigration controls and open the door to an extra 20 million "Africans and Asians" during the next two decades. Most of these "Africans and Asians" come from the predominantly Muslim countries of North Africa and the Greater Middle East. Frattini has also banned the use of the phrase Islamic terrorism: "People who commit suicide attacks or criminal activities on behalf of religion, Islamic religion or other religion, they abuse the name of this religion." He thinks we shouldn't use the word "immigration" either; we should talk about "mobility."

Why would anybody in their right mind want to import Islam, the most destructive force on the planet? Are EU leaders naïve? I don't think so, at least not all of them. You cannot maintain political power in the long run if you are totally naive.

We are told to treat cultural and historical identities as fashion accessories, shirts we can wear and change at will. The Multicultural society is "colorful," an adjective normally attached to furniture or curtains. Cultures are window decorations of little or no consequence, and one might as well have one as the other. In fact, it is good to change it every now and then. Don't you get tired of that old sofa sometimes? What about exchanging it for the new sharia model? Sure, it's slightly less comfortable than the old one, but it's very much in vogue these days and sets you apart from the neighbors, at least until they get one, too.

I have heard individuals state point blank that even if Muslims become the majority in our countries in the future, this doesn't matter because all people are equal and all cultures are just a mix of everything else, anyway. And since religions are just fairy-tales, replacing one fairy-tale with another one won't make a big difference. All religions basically say the same things in different ways. However, not one of them would ever dream of saying that all political ideologies "basically mean the same thing." They simply don't view religious or cultural ideas as significant, and thus won't spend time on studying the largely unimportant details of each specific creed.

Far from being an irrelevant detail, religion is the heart and blood of any civilization. The greatest change (until now) in my country's history was when we adopted Christianity instead of the Norse religion. This changed the entire fabric of our culture. Maybe Christianity helped in creating the foundations of nation states with an individualistic culture. If so, perhaps changing the religion is beneficial for those who want to replace nation states with authoritarian transnational entities, for instance the European Union. Islamic societies are always authoritarian. Those who want to abolish the democratic system and rule as an unaccountable oligarchy thus naturally prefer Islam.

The EU is an awful organization even if you don't take Muslim immigration into account. Former Soviet dissident Vladimir Bukovksy, who is not preoccupied with Islam, fears that the European Union is on its way to becoming another Soviet Union: "The sooner we finish with the EU the better. The sooner it collapses the less damage it will have done to us and to other countries."

The brilliant French political thinker Montesquieu advocated that the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government be assigned to different bodies, each of them not powerful enough alone to impose its will on society. This is because "constant experience shows us that every man invested with power is apt to abuse it, and to carry his authority as far as it will go." This separation of powers is almost totally absent in the EU, where there is weak to non-existent separation between the legislative, the executive and the judicial branches, and where all of them function more or less without the consent of the public.

As Montesquieu warned, "When the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person, or in the same body of magistrates, there can be no liberty; because apprehensions may arise, lest the same monarch or senate should enact tyrannical laws, to execute them in a tyrannical manner." He also stated that "Useless laws weaken the necessary laws." The problem with the EU is not just the content of laws, but their volume. Law-abiding citizens are turned into criminals by laws regulating speech and behavior, while real criminals rule the streets. This will either lead to a police state, to a total breakdown in law and order, or both.

At least two conditions must be fulfilled in order to prevent the arbitrary use of power. The first is a system of formal checks and balances, including the possibility of removing officials who are not doing their job. The second is transparency, so people know what their representatives are doing. The EU ignores both these conditions, especially the latter. Vast quantities of power have been transferred to shady backrooms and structures the average citizen hardly knows exist. Eurabia was created through such channels.

The pompous former French president Valéry Giscard d'Estaing declared that the creation of the proposed EU Constitution was Europe's "Philadelphia moment," alluding to the Philadelphia Convention or Constitutional Convention in the newly formed United States of America in 1787. The U.S. has its flaws, but if Mr. Giscard d'Estaing had actually understood the American Constitution, he would have discovered that Madison, Jefferson and others took care to implement checks and balances in the new state, precisely what is lacking in the EU. The American Constitution is short and understandable, whereas the EU Constitution is hundreds of pages long, incomprehensible and displays an almost sharia-like desire to regulate all aspects of human life. After it was rejected by Dutch and French voters, the Constitution was renamed and is being smuggled in through the back door.

Madison, Jefferson, Washington and the other American founding fathers acted in the open, were elected by their peers and applauded for their actions. Contrast this with Jean Monnet, who is credited with having laid the foundations of the EU. Most EU citizens never heard of him. He was never elected to any public office but worked behind the scenes to implement a secret agenda. I read an interview with a senior Brussels lobbyist who dubbed Monnet "the most successful lobbyist in history." To this day, the EU capital of Brussels is dominated by lobbyists. The Americans in Washington D.C. have their fair share of lobbyists, too, and this can be problematic. The difference is that the EU capital is wholly dominated by lobbyists and unelected bureaucrats.

Frankly, I don't think the EU has the right to use the term "European." Those inhabiting the European continent are first and foremost Germans, Dutchmen, Poles, Italians, Hungarians, Portuguese etc. "Europe" has existed mainly to protect the continent against Islamic expansionism. Charles Martel created Europe when he defeated the Arab invasion in the seventh century, later aided by people such as Pelayo, who started the Reconquista in the Iberian Peninsula, John Hunyadi and Lazar of Serbia who fought against the Turks in the Balkans and John III Sobieski, King of Poland, who beat the Ottomans during the 1683 Battle of Vienna. The EU is actively trying to undo everything Charles Martel and these men achieved. This makes it the anti-European Union, an organization with no moral legitimacy whatsoever.

The EU is gradually reducing the indigenous people of an entire continent to a future status as second-rate citizens in their own countries. It is quite possibly the greatest betrayal in the history of European civilization since the fall of the Roman Empire, yet it is hailed as a "peace project" in the media. It is shameful to witness the bullying displayed by EU leaders vis-à-vis the Serbs, who are being forced to give up their land to Muslim thugs. This template will eventually be used against all Europeans.

Some hope we can keep the "positive" aspects of the EU and not "throw out the baby with the bath water." I beg to differ. The EU is all bath water, no baby. The EU got off on the wrong path from its inception, and is now so flawed that it cannot be reformed. Appeasement of Islam is so deeply immersed in the structural DNA of the EU that the only way to stop the Islamization of Europe is to dismantle the European Union. All of it.

This is an edited version of an article by the anonymous Norwegian blogger Fjordman. It appeared on jihadwatch on February 9, 2008.

[NOTE: Also look at Fjordman's Ten Reasons to Get Rid of the European Union Slow to load. Be patient!]

Posted by Ruth at 05:16 PM OUTPOST
Muslim Immigration: America’s Biggest National Security Problem
Debbie Schlussel

While Presidential candidates debate which is best for our national security—staying in Iraq or leaving, beefing up troops in other spots of the world or bringing them home—the biggest national security threat is already inside our borders: Muslim immigrants.

The problem is that America not only sets no real limits on the number of Muslims allowed into our country, but also does a poor job—if any—of screening these individuals for terrorist background. Even when such screening is done, there is no real way to verify that the applicant is who he/she says he is. There have been many instances of terrorist suspects (and some who’ve been convicted) whose identities aren’t certain. They’ve given several different names in order to enter and stay in the U.S. And we don’t really know who they are.

Last year, a man who was given U.S. citizenship was convicted of spying on our troops on behalf of Al-Qaeda. A contractor, he served as a translator for our military in the Middle East, and passed on classified information about their movements in Iraq to Al-Qaeda insurgents. It led to ambushes and murders of our troops. I call the man Mr. Al-X because we’re not sure what this man’s name really is. He used the following names in gaining entry, citizenship, and access to classified information in his job with our armed forces: Noureddine Malki, Almaliki Nour, Abu Hakim, and Abdulhakeem Nour. One wonders which of these names will be on Mr. Al-X’s prison ID and which one or more of these aliases he will use after he serves his sentence in Federal Prison.

So, how does a man like Mr. Al-X, who professed support for Al-Qaeda and the 9/11 attacks, get to stay in the U.S., become a citizen and get access to U.S. Army classified info?

Well, there isn’t much of a check of backgrounds of any applicants for green cards and citizenship, also known as “immigration benefits.” Michael Maxwell, the former Director of Security for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) said that his former department spends, on average, less than six minutes looking into the background of every applicant. That doesn’t account for bathroom, smoking, and lunch breaks, which cut down on that time.

And until recently, during those less than six minutes USCIS employees were not allowed access to FBI terrorism databases against which to check to see if green card and citizenship applicants were on those lists. That wasn’t because the FBI didn’t grant access. It was because USCIS didn’t want employees who serve as immigration benefits adjudicators to spend time looking on these lists. Instead, the department gave monetary bonuses to employees to rubberstamp applications forward toward citizenship and discouraged any careful examinations or any significant number of rejections of applicants. Worse, even in those cases where immigration fraud was suspected or some other red flag was raised, about 80% of the cases referred to Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) by USCIS are turned down by ICE. Because those cases are not investigated, that means that 4 out of every 5 applicants for which immigration officials believe there are serious fraud or national security issues are approved for green cards and citizenship.

And even in cases where a thorough check of applicants was scheduled, those applicants are now being rushed through for citizenship. In February of this year, pursuant to a lawsuit brought by activists in the pro-Hamas, pro-Hezbollah American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC), the U.S. government announced that 47,000 immigration applications will skip the FBI background check against terrorist and other criminal databases. That’s because the government wants to “eliminate the backlog.” But the fact that most of these 47,000 individuals have been living here before they got such a background check is also frightening. We don’t know if these people are dangerous, but they’re in our midst.

Then, there is the other neglected issue of visa violators. While President Bush made a deal with Saudi King Abdullah to bring thousands of Saudi students per year to American colleges and universities, one of the biggest problems in the illegal alien population are those who’ve violated their visas by not leaving when their visa expired, or not abiding by the terms of the visa—such as working in an agricultural or high-tech capacity.

The San Jose Mercury News recently reported that 400,000 Indian nationals are here illegally and in violation of their H-1B visas because they are no longer working for high tech companies that brought them here. There is speculation that many of these 400,000 are Muslim Indians or other Muslims who are really from Bangladesh. Mahmud Abuhalima, one of the 1993 World Trade Center bombers, was here on an agricultural worker visa. But he was, instead, driving a taxi on the streets of New York, where not much crop-picking happens. But at that time the INS (like ICE now) did not put a priority on locating and deporting such visa violators who do not show up for work or school. Instead, the focus at ICE is on raiding meat-packing plants and employers where the illegal alien employees are mostly far less harmful Hispanic Catholics. So Muslim students and workers who disappear into our midst remain there, largely off the radar screen. Even when they are located and deported, if they had children, those kids have birthright citizenship and can remain here.

Finally, it’s important to come full circle to the issue of Muslim immigrants who’ve cleared every background check and are here legitimately. They bring with them their culture, mores, and intolerance (including a virulent anti-Semitism), but unlike other alien populations, most do not bring with them the desire to absorb into American culture. Instead, they want America to absorb into them and their ways. That’s why honor killings of Muslim American women are occurring with some frequency, as are female genital mutilations, violence, and food stamp and Medicaid fraud scams.

While all of these aspects of lax immigration are frightening, what’s even more frightening is that not a single person in contention for the White House has announced any intention to ever address them. And that’s why we may, in future generations, not have to worry about fighting Islamic terrorists. They will reach critical mass through their high birthrate and legal and illegal immigration. Then they can take over democratically.

Debbie Schlussel is a political commentator, radio talk show host, columnist, and attorney.

Posted by Ruth at 05:19 PM OUTPOST
monthly publication of
Americans For a Safe Israel
web site:

Wednesday, April 2, 2008


"Fitna" Revisited

from Observer
[NOTE: Reprinting this article does not mean that we endorse the somewhat snide approach to Geert Wilders by the UK Guardian. lw]

'I don't hate Muslims. I hate Islam,' says Holland's rising political star Geert Wilders, the popular MP whose film on Islam has fuelled the debate on race in Holland, wants an end to mosque building and Muslim immigration. Ian Traynor met him in The Hague

A TV addict with bleached hair who adores Maggie Thatcher and prefers kebabs to hamburgers, Geert Wilders has got nothing against Muslims. He just hates Islam. Or so he says. 'Islam is not a religion, it's an ideology,' says Wilders, a lanky Roman Catholic right-winger, 'the ideology of a retarded culture.'

The Dutch politician, who sees himself as heir to a recent string of assassinated or hounded mavericks who have turned Holland upside down, has been doing a crash course in Koranic study. Likening the Islamic sacred text to Hitler's Mein Kampf, he wants the 'fascist Koran' outlawed in Holland, the constitution rewritten to make that possible, all immigration from Muslim countries halted, Muslim immigrants paid to leave and all Muslim 'criminals' stripped of Dutch citizenship and deported 'back where they came from'. But he has nothing against Muslims. 'I have a problem with Islamic tradition, culture, ideology. Not with Muslim people.'

Wilders has been immersing himself in the suras and verse of seventh-century Arabia. The outcome of his scholarship, a short film, has Holland in a panic. He is just putting the finishing touches to the 10-minute film, he says, and talking to four TV channels about screening it.

'It's like a walk through the Koran,' he explains in a sterile conference room in the Dutch parliament in The Hague, security chaps hovering outside. 'My intention is to show the real face of Islam. I see it as a threat. I'm trying to use images to show that what's written in the Koran is giving incentives to people all over the world. On a daily basis Moroccan youths are beating up homosexuals on the streets of Amsterdam.'

Wilders is lucid and shrewd and the provactive soundbites trip easily off his tongue. He was recently voted Holland's most effective politician. If 18 months ago he sat alone in the second chamber or lower house in The Hague, his People's Party now has nine of 150 seats and is running at about 15 per cent in the polls. His Islam-bashing seems to be paying off. And not only in Holland. All across Europe, the new breed of right-wing populists are trying to revive their political fortunes by appealing to anti-Muslim prejudice.

A few months ago the Swiss People's Party of the pugnacious billionaire Christoph Blocher won a general election while simultaneously running a campaign to change the Swiss constitution to ban the building of minarets on mosques. Last month in Antwerp, far-right leaders from 15 European cities and from political parties in Belgium, Germany and Austria got together to launch a charter 'against the Islamisation of western European cities', reiterating the call for a mosque-building moratorium.

'We already have more than 6,000 mosques in Europe, which are not only a place to worship but also a symbol of radicalisation, some financed by extreme groups in Saudi Arabia or Iran,' argued Filip Dewinter, leader of Belgium's Flemish separatist party, the Vlaams Belang, who organised the Antwerp get-together. 'Its minarets are six floors high, higher than the floodlights of the Feyenoord soccer stadium,' he said of a new mosque being built in Rotterdam. 'These kinds of symbols have to stop.'

Where a few years ago the far right in Europe concentrated its fire on immigration, these days Islam is fast becoming the most popular target. It is a campaign that is having mixed results. In Switzerland, the Blocher party has been highly successful. In Holland, Wilders is thriving by constantly poking sticks in the eyes of the politically correct Dutch establishment. But when Susanne Winter ran for a seat on the local council in the Austrian city of Graz last month by branding the Prophet Muhammad a child molester, she lost her far-right Freedom Party votes.

For the mainstream centre-right in Europe, foreigner-bashing is also backfiring. Roland Koch, the German Christian Democrat once tipped as a future Chancellor, wrecked his chances a fortnight ago by forfeiting a 12-point lead in a state election after a campaign that denounced Muslim ritual slaughter practices and called for the deportation of young immigrant criminals.

Wilders echoes some of the arguments against multiculturalism that have convulsed Germany in recent years. Like many on the traditional German right, he wants the European Judaeo-Christian tradition to be formally recognised as the dominating culture, or Leitkultur. 'There is no equality between our culture and the retarded Islamic culture. Look at their views on homosexuality or women,' he says.

But if Wilders shares positions and aims with others on the far right in Europe, he is also a very specific Dutch phenomenon, viewing himself as a libertarian provocateur like the late Pim Fortuyn or Theo van Gogh, railing against 'Islamisation' as a threat to what used to be the easy-going Dutch model of tolerance.

'My allies are not Le Pen or Haider,' he emphasises. 'We'll never join up with the fascists and Mussolinis of Italy. I'm very afraid of being linked with the wrong rightist fascist groups.' Dutch iconoclasm, Scandinavian insistence on free expression, the right to provoke are what drive him, he says.

He shrugs off anxieties that his film will trigger a fresh bout of violence of the kind that left Van Gogh stabbed to death on an Amsterdam street and his estranged colleague Ayaan Hirsi Ali in hiding, or the murderous furor over the Danish cartoons in 2005.

The Dutch government is planning emergency evacuation of its nationals and diplomats from the Middle East should the Wilders film be shown. It is alarmed about the impact on Dutch business. 'Our Prime Minister is a big coward. The government is weak,' says Wilders. 'They hate my guts and I don't like them either.'

And if people are murdered as a result of his film? 'They say that if there's bloodshed it would be the responsibility of this strange politician. It's almost a self-fulfilling prophecy. They're creating an atmosphere. I'm not responsible for using democratic means and acting within the law. I don't want Dutch people or Dutch interests to be hurt.'

But he does want to create a stir. 'Islam is something we can't afford any more in the Netherlands. I want the fascist Koran banned. We need to stop the Islamisation of the Netherlands. That means no more mosques, no more Islamic schools, no more imams... Not all Muslims are terrorists, but almost all terrorists are Muslims.'

Free speech or hate speech? 'I don't create hate. I want to be honest. I don't hate people. I don't hate Muslims. I hate their book and their ideology.'

For more than three years, Wilders has been paying for his 'honesty' by living under permanent police guard as the internet bristles with threats on his life. He has lived in army barracks, in prisons, under guard at home. 'There's no freedom, no privacy. If I said I was not afraid, I would be lying.'

There is little doubt that if Wilders's film exists - and it's shrouded in secrecy - and is broadcast, it will be construed as blasphemy in large parts of the world and may spark a new bloody crisis in relations between the West and the Muslim world.

He does not seem to care. 'People ask why don't you moderate your voice and not make this movie. If I do that and not say what I think, then the extremists who threaten me would win.'

Source <>

Tuesday, April 1, 2008