By Melanie Phillips
The tenth anniversary of 9/11 has been marked by a fresh outbreak in Britain of the political equivalent of auto-immune disease: treating the mortal enemies of the west as the victims of the west, while treating the west’s defenders as its mortal enemies.
One thing al Qaeda got right about Britain and Europe (but not about the patriotic heartlands of the US) was that they no longer had the will to fight and die for their beliefs because they no longer knew what they were.
Surely, however, even al Qaeda could not have envisaged quite how stunningly incapable the western intelligentsia and political class would be of grasping the difference between civilisation and its would-be destroyers, and how comprehensively they would therefore play into the Islamists’ hands – even now, ten years on.
For the chattering classes seem determined to give al Qaeda a helping hand in reducing the west to a state of paralysis and impotence. According to liberal opinion, every single thing America did after 9/11 was wrong.
The strategy of pre-emptive war was wrong. Better, apparently, that Saddam should still be in power developing his nuclear, biological and chemical weapons programmes! Better that the Taliban were still in power training al Qaeda! Then we would all be so much safer!
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2036477/9-11-anniversary-Britain-travelled-steadily-edge-cliff.html
Posts tonen met het label Islamic colonization. Alle posts tonen
Posts tonen met het label Islamic colonization. Alle posts tonen
woensdag 14 september 2011
maandag 24 januari 2011
Digging Graves for the Next World War
Roland Shirk on January 23, 2011
A running theme in my recent commentaries has been the need to secure the safety of Western countries by limiting who enters them. I think most Jihadwatch readers are already convinced that the admission of millions of Muslims into Europe was a catastrophe on the order of... well, what historical incident equals it? The final outcome remains to be seen, so let me lay out a range of possibilities.
If the influx is stopped in the next few years, and Western societies overcome the self-gelding political correctness and hysterical scrupulosity that drives them to hold their own societies to an inhuman standard of Kantian selflessness--while endlessly indulging the sins of newcomers--it's possible that we will keep our freedoms intact without a major violent confrontation. For that to happen, we'd need to slam shut our borders, cut welfare programs that allow recent immigrants to breed irresponsibly on the taxpayers' dime, rigorously enforce laws suppressing sedition, infiltrate and expose terror networks already in our midst, and push back hard against attempts to force an alien religion into our cultural mainstream. If all that were to happen, there would be significant unrest among Muslim communities lasting several decades, but in general the level of violence would be low. We'd essentially have to reduce Islamic enclaves to the condition of the Basques--midsized, deeply disgruntled minorities treasuring claims against our territory, without the power to do much more than disrupt the peace, and occasionally murder some policemen. (Of course, the Basques have old, and in some ways legitimate grievances, since they really were here first--while the Muslims have none--but that's not really the issue.) If all those happy events were to come about, perhaps through the secret release of massive doses of testosterone into the water supply, then the decision of wretched socialists like Francois Mitterand to flood their motherlands with Saracens might be comparable to some mid-level historical blunder--like Napoleon's attack on Russia.
More at Jihad Watch
A running theme in my recent commentaries has been the need to secure the safety of Western countries by limiting who enters them. I think most Jihadwatch readers are already convinced that the admission of millions of Muslims into Europe was a catastrophe on the order of... well, what historical incident equals it? The final outcome remains to be seen, so let me lay out a range of possibilities.
If the influx is stopped in the next few years, and Western societies overcome the self-gelding political correctness and hysterical scrupulosity that drives them to hold their own societies to an inhuman standard of Kantian selflessness--while endlessly indulging the sins of newcomers--it's possible that we will keep our freedoms intact without a major violent confrontation. For that to happen, we'd need to slam shut our borders, cut welfare programs that allow recent immigrants to breed irresponsibly on the taxpayers' dime, rigorously enforce laws suppressing sedition, infiltrate and expose terror networks already in our midst, and push back hard against attempts to force an alien religion into our cultural mainstream. If all that were to happen, there would be significant unrest among Muslim communities lasting several decades, but in general the level of violence would be low. We'd essentially have to reduce Islamic enclaves to the condition of the Basques--midsized, deeply disgruntled minorities treasuring claims against our territory, without the power to do much more than disrupt the peace, and occasionally murder some policemen. (Of course, the Basques have old, and in some ways legitimate grievances, since they really were here first--while the Muslims have none--but that's not really the issue.) If all those happy events were to come about, perhaps through the secret release of massive doses of testosterone into the water supply, then the decision of wretched socialists like Francois Mitterand to flood their motherlands with Saracens might be comparable to some mid-level historical blunder--like Napoleon's attack on Russia.
More at Jihad Watch
Abonneren op:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
