Why the West is losing the War against Islam.

Anthony Cox

I have written about the myth of the moderate Muslim. Despite this the West, its political leaders, its media and academics persist in apologising for Islam.

In this writer’s opinion Islam is an invading force which has a parasitic effect on its non-Muslim host, eroding the values and society of the host from within by implacably opposing and destroying those values and replacing them with Sharia, the values of Islam.

For Islam, there are only two types of people in the world, Muslims and non-Muslims. Regardless of whatever internecine warfare and conflict occurs within Islam that is the united approach by all Muslims towards non-Muslims. Muslims live within the Ummah, non-Muslims, Kafirs do not and it is the duty of every Muslim to spread the Ummah.

In reality the only moderate Muslim is an apostate, a Muslim who has renounced their allegiance to Islam. One such apostate is Alisina who has provided an indictment of why the West is losing against Islam: (source)

Since the 9/11 attack on New York and the Pentagon in 2001, there have been close to 25,000 terrorist attacks worldwide, all of which were perpetrated in the name of Islam. That is about 5 terrorist attacks every day. So far two million people have been killed and a similar number are maimed and injured. These attacks are becoming more frequent. Yet something is not changing.
 

• Immediately after the attack, the president or the prime minister of the country in which the attack has taken place goes on TV and declares that this attack had nothing to do with Islam.

• Right after that the chief of police announces that he has taken all the measures to protect Muslims from any imaginary backlash and nonexistent reprisal.

• In the evening of the same day the mainstream media interviews an imam or a Muslim spokesperson who emphasizes that Islam does not condone violence.

• We are then told that extremists exist in all religions and reminded that some thirty years ago a few Christians killed a few abortionist murderers of unborn babies.

• Then the pundits are called to pontificate that the root cause of Islamic terrorism is not in what the terrorist themselves say, and nothing to do with the Quran (that in hundreds of verses calls on the believers to kill the unbelievers), but in the injustice done to Muslims in other parts of the world, such as in Abu Ghraib prison and particularly in Palestine where half a century ago Israelis defeated the Arab invaders who had vowed to drown them in the sea.

• A few days after that the police and the politicians of the victim country hold meetings with the leaders of the Muslim community where they conclude that more money should be given to the “moderate Muslims” to persuade the “radicals” to not take their religion seriously.

• The experts also conclude that emblems like Christmas and Christmas trees hurt the religious sentiment of Muslims and they should be removed from public institutions, shopping malls and schools, while at the same time Muslims should be given some concessions, like not requiring them to wash their hands before performing operation on patients, designating a room and Islamic toilets for them in public institutions, and allow them to apply for driving license without requiring them to show their face.

• Also, in the spirit of integration and community cohesion, everyone should be forced to eat halal meat, which involves extra cruelty to the animals, without their knowledge, whether they want it or not.

This tune is replayed every time there is a terrorist attack. The narrative never changes, despite the unequivocal assertion of the terrorists themselves who make it clear they are motivated by the teachings and examples of their prophet and his promise of virgins. Methinks, the record of history is broken. How else can we explain that after a repetition of 25,000 times one would not question the validity of this narrative?

Methinks Alisina is right. The West could destroy Islam tomorrow but is constrained by the very qualities which make the West an infinitely better system than the one offered by the cult of Islam: the West is tolerant, respectful, based on individual rights and fairness. Islam is none of those. But the West is also self-indulgent; some hard decisions have to be made and there is a lack of capacity in the West to make those decisions. Those decisions should be based on rectifying the problems described in Alisina’s summary.

H/T Anne