Replies

Islam has a problem and we have a problem with Islam. Jihadism (Islamo-fascism, Wahhabism, Salafism, or any other name for the radical "irreconcilable wing" of Islam) draws from within traditions of Islam, and Jihadists claim that they are the only good Muslims. It does not have to be so. There are billion plus Muslims in the world, and while 10% of radicals would make an enormous number, still bigger number of Muslims goes about their daily lives without being involved in Jihad against the West.

First, let me say that you make an excellent argument and in many ways I agree with your overall position.

However, where I find a possible (let me repeat possible problem) is in your conclusion that the non-jihadi, non-wahhabi, non-salafist muslims don't share the dream of a world muslim caliphate. Regarding the sharing of muslim dreams by radical and moderate alike, we simply don't know where to draw the line (and my guess is that neither do the muslims).

Having posed that rhetorical question, I must say that I surely don't have the answers. And I don't think I am alone in that.

Just last week, Tony Blair spoke in the House of Commons of his frustration with the muslim community's failure to help in resolving the issues of assimilation (and he was roundly criticized by prominent muslims like Sir Iqbal Sacranie for his statements).

To come to a bottom line, I think what I am saying is that there is no clear consensus as to a solution or, even, to the nature of the problem. Will making muslim friends around the world help us resolve this problem with islam...or, in the end, is that an act of appeasement. Will (indeed, can) muslims ever take sides with non-muslims over muslims regarding matter of assimilation and tolerance and peaceful co-existence? I wish I knew.

Until we find out, we in the west will walk a fine line.

Interesting points all.

On the matter of active non-assimilation of Muslims into communities in which they reside.

I think the practice is historical. Following the initial break out of Islam from its cradle in the Arabian peninsula into the then civilised world, and the spread of the faith by conquest, the conduct of the conquerers is quite interesting.

Most armies of conquest and occupation in history will settle in the conquered countries, take land, property and local women, and are assimilated into the population. The thrust of the conquest often dies out.

Islam did not do this but ensured that the occupiers formed their own Islamic enclaves within a conquered country, where Islamic conduct and culture were carefully preserved. They usually left existing administrative structures in place and just assumed oversight of them, using them to rule through and collect taxes via. (The Dhimmi tax or jizya)

Local merchants and those seeking advancement in the conquered countries had to make approaches to the Muslims for sanction and favours. They found that support of, or conversion to, Islam facilitated this process.

The conduct of Muslims in the 'Dar al-Harb' remains the same to this day.

The ploy is supported by their religious writings - for instance the well known exhortation not to take Jews and Christian as friends is just the most obvious, further study will turn up many more. This was intended to keep the Muslim faith 'pure'.

So friends, do not expect Muslims to become part of our democratic society any time soon. It would not be an overstatement to say such a course is, in fact, prohibited both by their history and their creed.

On the other hand, one could see the present process of Islamic immigration to the West as an unannounced, but active, continuation of the process, to first regain the Caliphate, and then to convert the whole World to become the 'Dar al-Islam' under the yoke of Islam. Heads up.

Let me pull a clinton here. I did not make a conclusion that non-jihadi muslims don't share the dream of a world muslim caliphate. They might. I don't want to be a thought police. What matters is actions. If the only thing Hitler did is to dream about Jews annihilation and throw slurs - you know, I can live with that.

The point is - I don't care what they think. The observable fact is that for the vast majority of muslims Jihad is not in the daily lives. It is good. They sit on the fence and don't rally against jihadists. It is bad and wrong. But it is not a smart policy for us to go postal and throw nukes at them just for that. It is also counterproductive to treat 1 billion people as one and the same. We can do smarter than that.

We should be unyielding and unforgiving against jihadists/Wahhabists, and we can exercise discretion with others. On assimilation and loyalty: also very strict and firm. We better make sure that we are safe inside. It will allow us to be more flexible outside. I see nothing wrong in imposing loyalty test and deport all unassimilated from the West. Also, on the question who is a good muslim and who is a bad muslim. It is up to them to decide. But they need to be told in no uncertain terms that we will accept only one answer: a peaceful one.

BTW, there is an interesting paradox here. Our leftists-appeasers in their denial of the existence of this war, actually embolden our enemies into taking reckless steps, that CAN hurt us so much that nukes will become an option.