The Communists claim to be working for peace and fighting against Islamic terrorism. This is however nothing but rhetoric. In reality they are fighting against the West and the Western interests and will not hesitate to backstab the champions of freedom fighters. The following is a rebuttal of a communist’s attack on Oriana Fallaci.

Azar Majedi is a Marxist. For all intents and purposes Marxism is a dead ideology. Iranian Marxists are a tiny fringe group with no popular support and most Iranians view them as traitors for their continued anti patriotic stance. Since their appearance in the political arena of Iran (1920) these communists have strove hard to make Iran part of the Soviet Union . Today they are behind all separatist movements in Iran and loath everything that is Iranian including the sun and the lion the emblem on its flag that dates back to at least 2500 years. The reason the communists are so anti patriotic is the same reason that Muslims are anti patriotic. They believe in a world dictatorship ruled by one single party, an equivalent of Islamic Caliphate. Therefore they see patriotism and nationalism as obstacles in their quest and do everything possible to undermine them.

Today the Iranian Marxists are divided in many factions. Ms. Majedi is a leader of the WPI, Worker-Communist Party of Iran (as if there is a Capitalist-Communist Party too). This group is a splinter of the Communist Party of Iran formed by Mansoor Hekmat in 1991. Upon Hekmat’s death in 2002 even this splinter was split in two antagonistic factions, each group claiming to be more “Hekmatist” than the other.

Hekmat, the ideologue and the icon of WPI was a Maoist who held that ruthless mass murderer as his hero. He founded the Union of Communist Fighters in 1978, and supported the Islamic Revolution of 1979. Soon after the Revolution succeeded Khomeini started eliminating those who had helped him to come to power and Hekmat escaped to Kurdistan (1981) where he helped the creation of the Communist Party of Iraq.

After the fall of the Soviet Union in 1989, the bankruptcy of the Marxist ideology became apparent worldwide, but Hekmat was a dogmatic ideologue. He was unable to accept the fact that Communism is a failed paradigm. Instead he claimed that neither the Soviet Union nor the People’s Republic of China were true socialist countries and advocated “return to Marx”. It is not difficult to see the similarity of this mindset and that of Muslim fundamentalists who think the cause of the backwardness of Muslims is because Islam has been weakened and see the answer to problems affecting the Muslim world in “return to pure Islam”. An ideologue cannot accept the fact that he has been duped.

In psychology this is called cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance is the discomfort felt when facing a discrepancy between what one already knows or believes to be true and new information or interpretation that contradicts that belief. It occurs when one has to accommodate new ideas.

The bigger is our commitment to a certain idea, the stronger will be our resistance to accepting ideas that contradict our previously known and accepted belief. The Psychologist Carl Rogers recognized that “accommodation is more difficult than Assimilation. And —counter-intuitively, perhaps—if learning something has been difficult, uncomfortable, or even humiliating enough, people are less likely to concede that the content of what has been learned is useless, pointless or valueless. To do so would be to admit that one has been ‘had’, or ‘conned’”.[1]

Cognitive dissonance was first investigated by Leon Festinger [2] and associates, arising out of a participant observation study of a cult which believed that the earth was going to be destroyed on a certain day and what happened to its members — particularly the really committed ones who had given up their homes and jobs to work for the cult — when the “Dooms Day” did not happen. While fringe members were more inclined to recognize that they had made fools of themselves and to "put it down to experience", committed members were more likely to re-interpret the evidence to show that they were right all along (the earth was spared because of the faithfulness of the cult members).[3]

I give this introduction so you can know where Azar Majedi comes from. Ms. Majedi is a dogmatic ideologue who is unable to accept the truth that Marxism is a hoax and it is finished. Fidel Castro, Kim Jong-Il, Azar Majedi, Maryam Namazi (Majedi’s comrade who is also active in the Internet) and their ilk are the last to wake up to this truth. In fact they may never do. Only those who were victims of ideologies can understand the grip that an ideology has on one’s mind. However since what Majedi says is the representation of a certain mindset that still lingers among the die hard Marxists in all Islamic countries and even in the West, I think it is worth discussing it and revealing its fallacy.

As a freethinker I consider it my duty to denounce communism in all its shapes and forms and make it clear that communism is an atheistic dogma/religion which has nothing to do with freethinking and democracy. Despite their claim of being “progressive” communists are regressive, close-minded, reactionary and very dogmatic. Let us also not be fooled by their “anti Islamic” rhetoric. Communists are the natural allies of Islamic terrorists and will stand together whenever their anti Western and anti democratic interests coincide.

In a 1953 interview Bertrand Russell said: “Communism does not oppose religion. It merely opposes the Christian religion, just as Mohammedanism does. Communism, at least in the form advocated by the Soviet Government and the Communist Party, is a new system of dogma of a peculiarly virulent and persecuting sort. Every genuine Agnostic must therefore be opposed to it.”[4]

A few days ago, in her Open Letter to Oriana Fallaci, Azar Majedi virulently attacked Ms. Fallaci accusing her of racism particularly for what she said in her interview with Margaret Talbot published in New Yorker.

Fallaci, the most celebrated and respected Italian Journalist and perhaps one of top journalists of the world, sees the threat that Islam poses on the Western world. She has written three fiery books “The Rage and the Pride”, “The Force of Reason,” and “The Apocalypse,” where she argues that Muslim immigrants are turning Europe into “a colony of Islam,” converting Europe into “Eurabia,” where soon “minarets will take the place of the bell-towers, with the burka in place of the mini-skirt”.

Fallaci argues that the Muslim immigration is another form of Islamic invasion, only this time the attack is made with “children and boats” instead of “troops and cannons.” Muslims are not going to integrate in the countries to which they immigrate. Their only objective is to conquer, subdue and dominate their hosts. “Because our cultural identity has been well defined for thousands of years” says Ms. Fallaci, “we cannot bear a migratory wave of people who have nothing to do with us . . . who, on the contrary, aim to absorb us.” She flays European leaders, for their muddleheaded multiculturalism who in their quest to placate Muslims for vote make absurd concessions such as allowing Muslim women to be photographed for identity documents with their heads covered and looking the other way when Muslim men violate the law by practicing polygamy.

Majedi calls this racism. She says Fallaci’s opposition to Islamic immigration betrays her fight against Nazi-Fascism. “It seems to me that the hate against Islam has pushed you towards Christianity” says Majedi to Fallaci and berates her for visiting Pope “asking him to take a stronger stance against Islamism”. Majedi finds this “puzzling” and wonders “how does an atheist in hate of one religion take refuge in another?”

Here is where Majedi reveals her dogmatic mindset. Who said an atheist must hate all religions or any religion for that matter? I do not believe in the existence of any deity that intervenes in the human affairs and is endowed with human attributes as most religions portray him, and yet I am reluctant to call myself an atheist because I do not want to be put in the same category of dogmatic materialists like Ms. Majedi. As a freethinker I am fighting against this very mentality that says I have found the truth and now I hate all other ideologies that do not agree with my truth. Who said as freethinkers or even as atheists we must hate all religions? Democracy and freedom of thought are the foundations of freethinking. A freethinker is not against people’s beliefs no matter how different those beliefs are from his. He is against intolerance. I do not have to believe in Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism or any other religion. As long as these religions are tolerant of people with views contrary to theirs I consider their followers my allies. The reason I am fighting against Islam is not because it is false but because it is intolerant. Truth is often in the eye of the beholder. If we had to oppose anyone who disagreed with our understanding of the truth, every human being must be at war with everyone else. We are not here to impose our version of the truth on others but to create a society in which people with all sorts of beliefs and convictions can live together in peace. Islam is incapable of coexisting in harmony with opposing views. That is why it must be singled out and defeated, not because it is false. Another ideology that is intolerant of opposing views is Communism. Communism is just as intolerant and fascistic as Islam. Dictatorship is dictatorship, whether it is the dictatorship of a religious group or the dictatorship of a social class. To justify their dictatorship communists, fascists and Islamists reinterpret the history, twist the facts and invent a warped philosophy that has nothing to do with reality. They wear blinders and choose to see only what validates their distorted claim and overlook all other facts. They are often against dialogue and when they come to power, they gag any criticism and contrary views.

Ms. Fallaci in her interview with Talbot particularly berated the leftists who according to her, subject people who criticize Muslim customs to a double standard. “If you speak your mind on the Vatican , on the Catholic Church, on the Pope, on the Virgin Mary or Jesus or the saints, nobody touches your ‘right of thought and expression.’” she said. “But if you do the same with Islam, the Koran, the Prophet Muhammad, some son of Allah, you are called a xenophobic blasphemer who has committed an act of racial discrimination. If you kick the ass of a Chinese or an Eskimo or a Norwegian who has hissed at you an obscenity, nothing happens. On the contrary, you get a ‘Well done, good for you.’ But if under the same circumstances you kick the ass of an Algerian or a Moroccan or a Nigerian or a Sudanese, you get lynched”. Azar Majedi just proved Fallaci right.

Please do not pretend to be anti Islamist Ms. Majedi. You and your ilk will side with Islam and take its terrorists as your allies in your fight against democracy anytime because you know that capitalism is democracy in economical terms. In order to impose your nefarious and bankrupt ideology of communism you must destroy capitalism. But that is not possible unless you destroy democracy, freedom of expression and freedom of faith.

When was the last time you condemned Islamic terrorism perpetrated against America and the Western counties? When was the last time you condemned Hamas for its continuous terrorist attacks on Israel ? Never! As far as you are concerned the terrorists in Iraq who kill innocent people and oppose the establishment of democracy in that country are “freedom fighters”. As long as they fight America and prolong the war, you will never condemn them even if they massacre thousands of non-combatants and children.

You tell Ms. Fallaci: “Your defence of a superior culture goes as far as expressing more concern about the beheading of Buddha's statue than murdered, maimed women and men in Afghanistan whose rights are violated daily, who are victims of political Islam and American militarism.”

Are Americans in Afghanistan to kill innocent men, women and children? Your dogmatism has blinded you. You have been reduced into an intellectual midget. This is the kind of stupid talk that we constantly hear from brainwashed Muslims. It is clear that it makes no difference whether you are a brainwashed Muslim or a brainwashed communist. Brainwashing is brainwashing. Ideologues can’t think straight. How can any rational person compare America to the Taliban and accuse them of murdering and maiming women and men in Afghanistan ? On what facts have you based this outrageous accusation? Isn’t it true that when American soldiers abuse their powers and commit crime against people they are court marshaled and severely punished? Continuing with your charade you wrote: “I found it offensive that a human being who enjoys a freedom fighter stature in the eyes of many, cares more about the cultural and physical ambiance of her native country than all those men, women and children who are killed, maimed and violated daily in Iraq .”

It is clear that you are a clueless person. Who kills these men, women and children? Aren’t they killed by the very insurgents whom you hail for prolonging the war and for doing everything possible to make democracy fail in Iraq ?

Also your use of the term “political Islam” is misleading and deceptive. It implies that there is also a non-political Islam. This is false. Islam is Islam and it is political by its very nature. This is like saying we are against poisonous cyanide. Do we have non-poisonous cyanide too? The objective of Islam is to conquer the world and establish the rule of Allah on Earth through his representative. Muslims never make distinction between political Islam and non-political Islam. There is no such thing as non-political Islam unless one throws out the Quran and rewrites a different book as the Ahmadyyah sect has done.

You continued: “As a staunch campaigner against terrorism, I feel indignant when I see our "Western" anti Islamist can only voice condemnation of terrorism taken place in the West. All terrorist acts which take place daily in countries under Islam are mentioned at best only in passing. Are people who have by draw of a lottery been born under the rule of Islam not worthy of your attention, passion and rage?”

Don’t make us laugh Ms. Majedi. You are a communist and we all know that communism advocates terrorism as the means to come to power. The very name “Union of Communist Fighters” that Mansoor Hekmat founded clearly shows that terrorism is part of your ideology. Aren’t you a Hekmatist too Ms. Majedi?

The entire 20th century was bloodied by Marxist terrorists. You can’t be a communist and a “staunch campaigner against terrorism”. Terrorism, which you prefer to call “armed struggle”, is part of your ideological makeup, just as Jihad is part of a Muslim’s faith. Did you express your concern when the Chinese authorities crushed the student demonstrations in 1989 killing countless innocent boys and girls who were fed up of communism and wanted freedom? Have you ever condemned Fidel Castro for keeping millions of Cubans in a virtual prison and in perpetual poverty? If you are so much concerned about the rights of the people in third would countries why we never read a word from you condemning Kim Jong-Il’s brutal regime? North Koreans are not good enough for you? Hypocrisy is written all over you. You are not against terrorism or you would have supported America ’s fight to bring democracy in Afghanistan and in Iraq . You are simply against America and will do anything including going to bed with Muslim terrorists to oppose America and sabotage its efforts to bring democracy in these beleaguered countries.

As for your question whether people born in Islamic countries are worthy or not that depends very much on their conduct and character. Ms. Fallaci explained clearly why she opposes Muslim immigrants. It is because they do not integrate but rather try to vandalize and destroy the countries to which they immigrate. In “The Rage and the Pride” Ms. Fallaci complains about Somali Muslims leaving “yellow streaks of urine that profaned the millenary marbles of the Baptistery” in Florence . “Good Heavens!” she writes. “They really take long shots, these sons of Allah! How could they succeed in hitting so well that target protected by a balcony and more than two yards distant from their urinary apparatus?” Six pages later, she describes urine streaks in the Piazza San Marco, in Venice , and wonders if Muslim men will one day “shit in the Sistine Chapel.” This is a fact. Muslims deface the character of the Western cities and reduce them into casabas. Muslims have zero respect for the sacred places of other faiths when they themselves demand others to pay utmost respect to their terrorist schools they call mosque. Ms. Fallaci is not denouncing Muslims for who they are but for what they do.

You wrote: “Your hate against Islamism and political Islam finds expression in Euro centrism. Your disapproval for multiculturalism and cultural relativism has led you to defend "western culture", instead of universal rights and secular, humanitarian and libertarian values.”

Multiculturalism is a failed paradigm and cultural relativism, the offspring of moral relativism is hypocrisy. Who said all cultures are equal? How can a “culture” that condones wife beating, honor killing, stoning, child rape, eye gauging, hand chopping, polygamy and other barbarities be equal to a culture that supports equality, freedom of expression and democracy? How can a society that is based on tolerance coexist with one that is founded on intolerance? Multiculturalism has been a gross mistake and must be repealed if the Westerners care about preserving their culture. Multiculturalism with Islam means we would allow Muslims to promote their faith and ban the criticism of Islam so that they become strong and take away all our freedoms. This is insanity.

One reader of FFI wrote he took a cab from airport to his home and on the way he asked the driver to stop at a liquor store. The cabby refused on the ground that he was a Muslim. Understandably this person became livid that a Muslim immigrant had the audacity to impose his religion on him in America . When shouted at, the Muslim complied. But once Muslims become a force to recon with, you can no longer shout at them. They will then do as they please and if you complain you will be beaten to death. They would force all women into veil and beat those who don’t. As a woman who has supported the Islamic Revolution in Iran , you should know that. If you were in Iran you must have been forced to cover your head with scarf. I know you did it because I do not see the mark of acid burn on your face. A 9 years old child was foolish enough to resist wearing chador and her head was smashed with the butt of the gun. This will happen here in the West if we do not stop Islam now.

It is not that I am against multiculturalism. But when we talk about multiculturalism, we talk about a multitude of CULTURES. Islam is not a culture but a cult. It is barbarity. Also multiculturalism is okay in some places such as in America where most people are immigrants but it’s not okay in Europe where there are ancient indigenous cultures in place already. These cultures must be respected and preserved and not diluted with other cultures. Multiculturalism in Europe means the death of the Western culture. We don’t want to see that happen just as we don’t want to see the death of Indian culture, Chinese culture or Japanese culture. Those who immigrate to Europe must adapt to the European culture, assimilate it and not try to change it.

You cooperated with Muslims to bring the Revolution in Iran. They used you and then disposed of you like a used toilet paper. You have not learned your lesson. You still defend Muslims. Why? It’s because you are an ideologue. According to your holy book your enemy is democracy, capitalism and Judeo-Christianity and not Islam. You are blinded to see the danger that Islam and Multiculturalism pose on the West. Western world is in danger of becoming extinct. Of course you don’t give a damn because you have your communist utopia that you want to impose once all cultures are annihilated and anarchy prevails. Multiculturalism is part of the bigger plan of the political left to destroy the Judeo-Christian foundation of the West.

Oriana Fallaci is the Joan of Arc of the West. She is the modern day Cassandra. The Westerners would ignore her warnings at their own peril. Yet the leftists berate this heroine woman at every turn. Riding high on their moral horse they accuse this indefatigable champion of freedom of intolerance. The left leaning La Repubblica denounced Fallaci of cultural chauvinism and wrote: “We are a pluralistic society because we permit mosques to be built in our own home, and we cannot give this up just because in Kabul they put evangelical Christians in jail. If we did, we would become Taliban ourselves.”

But we must not tolerate intolerance. Look at what happened in Lebanon. Prior to 1975 the Christians were the majority and they were constitutionally guaranteed the control of the government. But Muslims kept breeding like rabbit, as they do in the West until the population balance was shifted in their favor. As their numbers grew, Muslims became militant and defied the government. The government was unable to contain the militants because Muslim soldiers defected the army and joined the militants. Then they began the indiscriminate killing of non-combatant Christians. Cars and buses were stopped in the middle of the roads at gunpoint, the passengers were ordered to show their identity and if they were Christians, they were shot dead on the spot. They showed no mercy on anyone. Women and children were butchered with no compunction. The Christians fought back but they were no match for Muslim brutality. They fought the Muslim combatants but could not bring themselves to kill innocent people for just being Muslims. Muslim fighters had no such scruples. At the end the Muslims won the war and the Christians had to seek refuge elsewhere or became second class citizens in their own country.

What happened in Lebanon will happen in every country of Europe . Those who don’t learn the lessons of history will be forced to relive it.

Those who advocate multiculturalism play with fire. They are fools who do not understand Islam and the nature of the threat that it poses on their world. Read the history and learn how Islamic countries became Islamic. Every country that became Islamic has a history similar to that of Lebanon .

Muslims, to the extent that they follow Islam, are bereft of human conscience. We are not willing to butcher innocent people just because they are Muslims but Muslims would happily kill our children and innocent non-combatants with no qualm. Shouldn’t we learn something from Beslan? Muslims will bomb and even nuke our cities targeting average people. Can we do the same to them? No, we can’t. This is their strategic advantage over us. During the time of Muhammad Muslims won, not because they were militarily stronger, but because they were meaner; because they did not play by the rules; because they used the element of surprise and fought dirty; because they used deception as a strategy. These are the very things that make us vulnerable and make them strong.

In my previous short article, The status of non-Muslims in Islam, I said we have three choices in front of us.

a) Rapidly spread the truth about Islam and wean Muslims from this cult.
b) Prepare ourselves to become second class citizens in our own countries, or be slain by the Muslim sword.
c) Smash Muslims so brutally that they can never raise their heads and dream of conquering the world and reducing us into second class citizens or dealing with us with sword.

I added that choice ‘a’ is the preferred choice of Faith Freedom International. We are succeeding but not fast enough. If we fail, I said, since most people find alternative ‘c’ abhorrent, alternative ‘b’ is the option of default. Someone responded: “I cannot believe that option ‘b’ would ever be considered by anyone. If option ‘a’ doesn't work, then option ‘c’ is the only possible default.” I regret to say that this is wishful thinking. This person does not know the history of Islam. Since day one, Islam has always succeeded because Muslims were willing to wage their jihads with no conscience while the non-Muslims were unable to do the same. Our conscience is our deterrent while Muslims have no such constraints. The utter lack of conscience and their readiness to commit any heinous crime for the advancement of their cause, gives these “sons of Allah”, as Ms. Fallaci calls them, an edge and a tremendous power that will make them win over their most formidable adversary.

Consider the scenario that a tiny group of Muslim jihadis start killing innocent people in various terrorist acts such as poisoning the water and food supply, releasing deadly bacteria, randon killing, etc., while you certainly can’t retaliate against the “innocent” Muslims who have not been directly involved in those killings. This is certainly a difficult situation on its own. Now add to this the fact that among the Westerners, there are a great number of useful idiots who take the side of the Muslims and defend them as Ms. Majedi and other brain-dead leftists do. This puts us in a very vulnerable situation. Not only we have an enemy that is killing us, we also have a foolish “friend” that is worse than the enemy. He opens the gates of our citadels to our enemy and tries to hold us back from defending ourselves.

In Persian we have a saying: “A wise foe is better than a foolish friend”. These foolish friends keep telling us that if we fight back we will be like our enemy, while they go to our enemy and tell them not to give up. They organize “peace rallies" to fool our children but keep telling the enemy that they are freedom fighters. The truth is that if we do not fight back we will be dead. That is why we have two enemies. One is Islam and Islamic terrorism and the other is the political left and the politically correct fools. With these fools among us, we are very weak and vulnerable. And yes the possibility of losing this war is very real. The leftists are not with us. They are against us. The fact that they are among us and even sometimes act as our government makes them more insidious. They are traitors not friends.

Oriana Fallaci offers a forth alternative. She suggests we should stop the flow of Muslim immigrants into the West and send the ones that are here and do not want to integrate back to where they came from. This is far more humane way to handle the situation than letting options ‘b’ or ‘c’ happen. Sending back the Muslims to their countries of origin is not unfair. In Islamic countries you will not become a citizen for being born there. If you are an Italian born in Iran, you will remain a foreigner always even if your parents were Italians born in Iran . You can only become a national if your father is an indigenous Iranian. In fact if your father is Iranian you cannot lose your Iranian citizenship even if you were born outside Iran . This is true in all Islamic countries. So, sending those Muslims who do not want to integrate and still want to cling to their ideology of hate back to their countries of origin is something that they understand perfectly. Muslims want Sharia. How about giving it to them? Maybe this will sober them. How about treating them the way they treat the non-Muslims in their countries? What Falalci is proposing is far more realistic than what we hope to achieve in FFI. Education works and it is the best way because once Muslims are weaned from Islam they are cured and they can be as good citizens as anyone else. But education is slow and time is running out.

Fallaci told Talbot “I am known for a life spent in the struggle for freedom, and freedom includes the freedom of religion. But the struggle for freedom does not include the submission to a religion which, like the Muslim religion, wants to annihilate other religions. Which wants to impose its ‘Mein Kampf,’ its Koran, on the whole planet. Which has done so for one thousand and four hundred years. That is, since its birth. Which, unlike any other religion, slaughters and decapitates or enslaves all those who live differently.”

Then Ms. Majedi exposes the hypocrisy of her doctrinal mindset and says: “All these become so ironic when one looks deeply into the root of political Islam. When one remembers how the Western governments unleashed this monster on the people of the region, how they created the Mojahedin in Afghanistan in the cold war era, and then helped the Taliban, how in the fear of a leftist revolution in Iran dumped Khomeini on us and helped bring about an Islamic state, when one remembers these recent historical facts, one cannot help but discern a profound sense of hypocrisy and double standard.”

This is a communist lie. Khomeini was not dumped on us by any Western government. He was dumped on us by the Islamists and the communists. This very woman who is now accusing the West of dumping Khomeini on us marched in the streets shouting anti American slogans and hailed Khomeini. Her hero, Mansoosr Hekmat, backed the Islamic Revolution. Of course BBC had a great role in this. It incited people and volunteered to be the mouthpiece of the Islamists the way Al Jazeerah is the mouthpiece of Al Qaida today. But BBC is under the control of the leftists. It was the political Left and the communism International that went to bed with the Islamists to bring Khomeini to power. It is hypocritical to blame the West for your own blunders. But it is fair to say that the leftists of the West played a key role in inciting the foolhardy Iranians, just as they were instrumental for giving Saddam hope that he will be protected, just as they are fomenting terrorism today by giving moral support to the terrorists in Iraq and in Palestine .

The success of the Islamists in Iran inspired other Islamists to pick the fight in the name of Islam and we ended where we have ended today. The leftist useful idiots have never accepted their responsibility and now they blame others for their own blooper.

America did not create the Mujahedin in Afghanistan. It supplied them with weapons to fight back the Soviets who had occupied that country. What else they could do? Let the Soviets continue devouring one country after another? What other option America had? Enter in war with the Soviets directly? Under the circumstances, helping the Mujahedin to fight the Soviets was the only option. There is no doubt that the defeat of the Soviets in Afghanistan demoralized the Russians and contributed to the fall of that evil empire. However, Regan also made big mistakes.

When Gorbachev asked him to help establish a government in Afghanistan , Reagan snubbed and said the Afghanis know how to run their own affairs. Gorbachev needed a face saving plan to withdraw which incidentally was also the best for everyone. He was surprised when Regan rejected his request. Well, now we all pay the consequence of this man’s obstinacy. But the truth is that Regan had no understanding of Islam and frankly few have and still most politicians don’t. Even the present president of America is in grave error when it comes to Islam. That is why I have written the book ‘Understanding Islam and the Muslim Mind’. As long as our politicians don’t know Muslims and what they are capable of, we are all in great peril.

But isn’t it hypocritical of you to blame America for backing the Mujahedin in Afghanistan, which by the way, not all of them the Taliban, when you and your communist comrades also helped Khomeini to come to power? Regan in Afghanistan had no choice. He had to fight the Soviets and helping the Mujahedins, which included also the Northern Alliance who remained loyal to America, was his only straw. But the communists in Iran were not under any pressure to help the Islamists. In fact they could have backed Shapour Bakhtiar who had spent all his life fighting the Shah and his despotism. They didn’t because they wanted revolution.

It’s funny how the communists and the Islamists resemble each other! They lie without scruples, twist the facts and even contradict their own words. A good example of that is the following. Ms. Majedi writes: “Sadly the saga of helping political Islam and Islamic terrorism by the Western governments is an ongoing effort. Just look at Iraq! The US and Britain, by invading Iraq , helped Islamists grow monstrously therein.”

Here this communist is contradicting herself in one single breath. Are the US and Britain helping the Islamists in Iraq or fighting them? Is she really this much confused or does she think her readers are drunk? Is fighting Islamic terrorism in Iraq helping the terrorists? Should America pull out and leave the terrorists free to do as they please? And this woman calls herself an intellectual. Where is the intelligence?

Who is supporting the insurgency in Iraq? Aren’t the communists and the leftists who have rallied behind the terrorists? This is the acme of hypocrisy. The communists are in cahoots with Hamas and with the Iraqi insurgents, encouraging them to continue the fight and at the same time blame the West. These leftists are the ones who have kept the flames of war burning while shamelessly they organize “peace rallies” and portray themselves as promoters of peace. Far from it! What they want is surrender of the West. When Muslims and communists talk about peace what they actually mean is that you stop fighting back our aggression. Leave our hands free so we can destroy you. If they really meant peace, they should be pleased that the tyrants such as Saddam and Mullah Omar are removed from power and people now have the chance to elect their own governments freely.

Why the communists are not happy with this outcome? It is because they know that with democracy economy will also improve and people would no longer be interested in revolutions. This means the death warrant for communism. That is why they have panicked. They will do anything to destroy the fledgling democracies in these countries. That is why they did not support Dr. Bakhtiyar, Shah’s arch-opponent and ironically his last prime minister. It’s because Bakhtiyar promised democracy and this was not what the communists had in mind. The more unrest they can create the higher will be their chances to garner popular support and hopefully one day to materialize their wet dream and establish Communism International.

Majedi continues: “The Western academia and journalists invented and nurtured the concept of cultural relativism, so that on its basis they could justify compulsory veiling, stoning, maiming and torturing of the people under the rule of Islam. That gave justification for turning one's head while one's government made deals with those Islamic states. This concept was invented so under the guise of "respect for other cultures" the brutal crimes and violation of human rights will be brushed aside "respectfully". We have witnessed how European courts have resorted to cultural relativism in defending deportation of immigrants fleeing the rule of Islam. They have gone as far as stating that the prison conditions in those countries are suitable for those people.”

Hmm…! Didn’t she berate Ms. Fallaci earlier saying “Your disapproval for multiculturalism and cultural relativism has led you to defend 'western culture', instead of universal rights and secular, humanitarian and libertarian values”? She seems to be saying something totally different now. Now she is against cultural relativism. I don’t know why my head started itching suddenly. What is exactly her position? Is she against or in favor of cultural relativism?

Who is responsible for cultural relativism? Cultural relativism is the child of political correctness and that is an invention of the political left. It is the political left that has given birth to this monstrosity. Fallaci is brave enough to call a spade a spade. She is denouncing cultural relativism. And what Majedi does? Does she thank her? Is she grateful to Fallaci for her bravery and wisdom? No! She attacks her. She calls her racist. Does she even understand how absurd is her stance? Is she flip-flopping or she does not know the meaning of cultural relativism?

Ms. Majedi has written an open letter denouncing Oriana Fallaci for opposing cultural relativism and now she says cultural relativism is bad. If this is not confusing what is? If you’re against cultural relativism why you criticize Fallaci? Fallaci says Islam is barbarism and Muslims do not belong here because they are not willing to melt. If you truly believe that cultural relativism is an evil thing why you attack her? This woman is absolutely incoherent. All she wants to do is attack a true freedom fighter and does not even know how to do it.

Majedi writes: “I must state that these arrogant, hypocritical and racist attitudes and policies are an important tool to foster political Islam. If one does not distinguish between the Islamic movement, a reactionary and brutal political movement, and ordinary Moslems who are the first hand victims of this, if one does not distinguish between the oppressor and the oppressed, one becomes an accessory to Islamic brutality.”

The only arrogant hypocrite I can see here is you and your comrades Ms. Majedi. Islam is an ideology. An ideology, no matter how evil it may be, cannot harm anyone if it is not believed and practiced. Islam is dangerous because Muslims believe in it and practice it. The Aztecs also had a dangerous belief that demanded human sacrifice. But their belief poses no danger to anyone because no one is practicing it anymore. Yes Muslims are the primary victims of Islam but it’s they who endanger the world. If a group of people become infected by SARS or bird flue, they are victims.The culprit is the virus. There is no dispute about that. But they can pass their deadly disease to other. That is why they must be quarantined. We at FFI want to help Muslims recover. This is our primary goal. Ms. Fallaci does not see Muslims flocking to our doors seeking the cure to their sickness. She does not have much hope that the cure would actually work or come soon enough. So as a pragmatic and rational person she is suggesting that Muslims should be quarantined. She is a wise woman. This isolation is going to help Muslims recover faster. Is it an infringement of their human rights? Yes, but under the circumstances this is the best option. A person who carries a contagious deadly disease has no right to mingle with others. This would be criminal. The alternative is to let Muslims become more numerous and then we would run out of options. Then we must decide whether let them exterminate us or fight back and kill them before they kill us. An ounce of prevention is better than a pound of remedy. As I explained above, the likelihood of we killing the Muslims is slim. This will leave only one outcome and that is surrender to Islam or death. They will kill so many of us until we capitulate and you lady will have nowhere to escape this time. This time you, or your daughter, will be forced into chador for good, because thanks to your ill advice, the West has also been destroyed. This last bastion of freedom will be conquered and freedom will be strangled. Where will you flee to this time?

Majedi continues: “We must try and understand the root causes of Islamic recruitment among the so-called Moslem communities in the West. The dominant racism in state policies and attitude and systematic marginalization of these communities plus the aggression and militarism of the Western governments led by the US against the people in the Middle East, namely, Palestine and Iraq, have directed the youth in these communities to despair and frustration. The revolt of the "suburb" in France is a vivid and sad example of such policies. By rejecting these communities as part of "us" we leave them at the mercy of the "leaders of the community", who foster traditionalism, Islamism, sexism, and glorification of the "home land". These are poisonous brain washings. And I must say that your stance is aiding this process.”

That is wrong. The root cause of Islamic terrorism is not poverty and marginalization; it is Islam. It is the Quran damn it. It’s this bloody book of terror that incites Muslims to this much savagery. One Christian Journalist in Nigeria said that if Muhammad was alive he would want to marry one of the contestants participating in the beauty pageant in that country. Muslims rioted, burned churches and houses and killed more than two hundred innocent Christians. Was this the result of poverty and marginalization of Muslims?

In Sudan the ruling Muslims have launched a war of genocide on the non-Muslim minority of that country since that country’s independence in 1956. The first attack of the Muslims on the non-Muslim population happened in 1955 and ended in 972. Again in 1983 the president declared Sharia law in the South where the majority of the population is non-Muslim. Another civil war and genocide of innocent non-Muslims ensued that lasted till 2005. The abuse of the non-Muslim minority continues. According to some reports, up to 450,000 people, mostly non-Muslims have been killed. Was this the result of poverty and marginalization of Muslims?

In Pakistan more than 4000 people have been killed in Shia-Sunni violence since 1980s. Is this the result of poverty and marginalization of Muslims?

In India Muslims enjoy all rights and in fact they have more privileges than the Hindus. Nonetheless, since 1996 there has been over 10,500 militancy related incidents perpetrated by Muslim terrorists, including 646 grenade attacks, 920 bomb explosions, 618 incidents of arson, 123 rocket attacks and 2,868 incidents of random firing. During this period, more than 3,000 civilians were killed. 200 of them were kiled when seven bombs were exploded in a train a couple of days ago. Is this the result of poverty and marginalization of Muslims?

What about the riots over a bunch of cartoons? Had that anything to do with poverty and marginalization of Muslims? Did Osma Bin Laden become a terrorist out of poverty? Are any of his lieutenants coming from poor families? Have any of the terrorists, so far captured or killed during suicide bombings been poor?

Why talk nonsense Ms. Majedi? Your brain is fossilized by your Marxist indoctrination. You interpret everything in terms of capital/labor struggle. This is dogmatism and brainwashing. You are not in intellectual. You are an ideologue. For you, the solution to all human problems is to rob the rich and give it to the poor. You can’t see anything beyond that.

I am sorry, but you are mistaken. The problem of Islam is much bigger than that. Economy has nothing to do with it. Khomeini knew Islam better than you. He said “People did not make revolution for economy. They made revolution for Islam. Economy is for donkey”.

Your problem lady is that you fail to listen. All you have to do is listen to Muslims. They will tell you why they are doing this. They are doing this to conquer the world for Allah not for economy. Listen to people when they talk. Listen to the sermons delivered in the mosques. There is no mention of economy. It's all about Allah hating the kafirs. Read a few books other than those written by fellow Marxists. Haply truth may dawn on you and you may understand a thing or two.

The truth is that when Muslims are poor and weak they never do Jihad. They have instruction to postpone this religious obligation until they become strong and capable to wage a winning Jihad. The reason Jihad had started again after centuries of armistice is because Muslims have seen the color of money. Thanks to oil and thanks to the money that they make as immigrants in the West, they now feel strong enough to wage a winning Jihad. Terrorism offers them an edge. With this tool a few of them can hide in the darkness of anonymity and cowardly inflict heavy casualties on a great number of people. With little money they can destroy the economy of big countries.

This is why Islamic terrorism has made a comeback. If Muslims were kept in abject poverty to the extent that all they could think of was, where to get their next meal, they would not have had the energy to think about Jihad. I have explained this point in another article. Islamic terrorism has nothing to do with poverty and marginalization of Muslims. On the contrary with more wealth in the hands of Muslims we will see more terrorism. Reduce them into poverty again and they will turn ass lickers and friendly again. This is how the mind of the bully works.

The revolt of the suburbs in France had nothing to do with poverty just as the revolts over cartoons had nothing to do with poverty. It was a show of force. Muslims were merely flexing their muscles and testing the waters, planning their next attack. These are maneuvers to take control of Europe . The solution was not to throw more money at them. The solution was to round them up and deport them en mass. You can’t placate bullies by appeasement. Now Europe must prepare herself for the final showdown. Europe will burn, as Fallaci has predicted. It will burn because of foolishness of its inept politicians who instead of becoming tougher with their enemies, try to win them through appeasement. The problem is that when you appease the bully you feed his aggression and make him stronger.

It is not the West that has rejected Muslims as part of “us”. I have never felt this “us” vs. “them” mentality in the West. This is an Islamic mentality. It is Muslims who do not want to integrate. It is they who are unwilling to give up their doctrine of hate and division. Why the Chinese, the Hindus the Filipinos and others do not feel marginalized in the West? Why the Jews, the Zoroastrians, the Christians and the Baha’is in Iran and in all Muslim countries are marginalized? All one has to do is read the Quran and one can see how non-Muslims are berated, vilified and dehumanized. They are called najis (filthy), monkeys, pigs, gone astray, fuel for Fire and Muslims are asked not to take them as friends and not to obey their rule. “Kafir” vs. “Muslim” is an Islamic concept. You have a much distorted understanding of reality. You are a very confused person.

Who said Muslims glorify their homelands? At least in this you can take solace that Muslims are as traitors to their homelands as you communists are. Muslims, like you, have no sense of patriotism. Just like you who believe in a world dictatorship of proletariats - one party rule under the iron fist of one ruler - Muslims also believe in a world dictatorship of Islam - one ummah under the divine mandate of one khalifah.

As a world federalist I strongly believe in patriotism. The pillars of a world federal government are strong and independent nations. That is why I am a patriot and I encourage everyone to love his country and server her. Patriotism is our protection against world dictatorship, be it in the form of Islamism or communism. I love mankind and I hope to see it united, but in democracy and freedom, not in a dictatorship as Hitler, Muhammad and Marx intended. I will fight until my last breath against all attempts that are designed to take away the freedom of individual in favor of collectivism and the independence of national sovereignty in favor of a superstate.

Ms. Majedi writes: “I find it so hard to understand that in despising the oppressor and oppressing ideology you come to despise the victims just as much. No sympathy, no compassion for the victims. No rage and passion provoked for these people who live under these inhumane and brutal conditions.”

Charity starts at home. Ms. Fallaci is an Italian and her responsibility is to her country first and to Europe next. Unlike you, she is a patriot. She loves her country and cares to preserve its culture and values. Unlike you, she is not a cultural and moral relativist and does not believe in a homogenized humanity. Diversity is beautiful and she wants to maintain her own unique culture and identity. Unlike you she has not lost her commonsense to an ideology and does not scorn her own culture. It is not her responsibility to care about the “sons of Allah” who have invaded her country, pee on her cultural heritage and aim to destroy it.

Helping Muslims is OUR responsibility – yours and mine. I am doing my part to the extent of my ability. I am opening the eyes of Muslims and helping them to leave this cult of hate. But what Fallaci says is absolutely true. Time is running out and Muslims pose a great threat to the West. Why should she care if they are victims or not? We must help Muslims get out of Islam and the Westerners must defend their countries and their culture. If we fail we must have the plan B in place. Fallaci offers that plan. The Westerners must listen to Fallaci. Not doing so could mean the death of the Western civilization. This is no hyperbole. I am also a westerner now and as much as I feel it’s my duty to help the Muslims recover from the disease of Islam, I am also obliged to save the West and I fully endorse Oriana Fallaci.

One of Ms. Fallaci’s fans wrote: “If [immigrants] do not share our ideas, then why do they come to Italy ? Why should we endure arrogance and interference by those who have no desire to integrate into our system and who are darkened by anti-Western hatred? We welcome them as guests, but immediately they act like the owners.” This is plain truth. When I first came to the West, incidentally it was Italy . I was received with open arms. I never felt any discrimination or marginalization. An elderly Italian couple adopted me as their son. They invited me to have lunch with them every Sunday and anytime I felt lonely they called me to go there and watch TV with them. They made me feel welcome even though I did not speak their language. Italians were open and friendly. If they are now hardening, it is because the Muslims have shown to be unworthy of their friendship and trust. Why should anyone love his enemy? If these sons of Allah want to be loved and accepted, shouldn’t they respect the culture of their hosts first? How can you love someone who comes to your home, disrespects you, pisses on your furniture and rapes your daughter blaming her for not covering herself enough?

Majedi writes: “I was enraged by reading your racist comments. I was indignant by sensing your Euro centrism, by your lack of human compassion for millions who fled the rule of Islam and took refuge in the West in the hope of a better life.”

So you were enraged! Well, I will not tell you anything. I will only quote what Fallaci said to people who are enraged by her. She said: “Now I open my big mouth. I say, ‘What are you going to do to me? You go fu.ck yourself—I say what I want.’ ”

Well said dear Oriana. How can anyone not love this woman? I propose we clone her - Make a few thousands and let them run the world. Now that you are at it, please make one colone of me too. I want my colone marry one of hers. That is my kind of woman.

And let me tell you Ms. Majedi this, because you don’t seem to understand it on your own. Those millions did not flee the rule of Islam. If they did why in the hell they want to bring Islam to the West? Why they cling to this damn cult and try to impose it on others? You seem to be a very confused woman. The entire night I read to you the story of Leili and Majnoon and now you ask whether Leili was a man or a woman? What is this nonsense you are talking about? The whole problem is in the fact that these millions don’t leave Islam. They do not want to integrate. If they did we wouldn’t have this discussion. Sheesh!

Why is Fallaci against Islam and Muslims? It’s because she sees the threat of Islamic fundamentalism as a revival of the Fascism that she grew up fighting. She told Margaret Talbot: “I am convinced that the situation is politically substantially the same as in 1938, with the pact in Munich , when England and France did not understand a thing. With the Muslims, we have done the same thing.” In an email she told Talbot: “Look at the Muslims: in Europe they go on with their chadors and their burkas and their djellabahs. They go on with the habits preached by the Koran, they go on with mistreating their wives and daughters. They refuse our culture, in short, and try to impose their culture, or so-called culture, on us. . . . I reject them, and this is not only my duty toward my culture. Toward my values, my principles, my civilization. It is not only my duty toward my Christian roots. It is my duty toward freedom and toward the freedom fighter I am since I was a little girl fighting as a partisan against Nazi-Fascism. Islamism is the new Nazi-Fascism. With Nazi-Fascism, no compromise is possible. No hypocritical tolerance. And those who do not understand this simple reality are feeding the suicide of the West.”

Brava Oriana! Bravissima! You have the wisdom to distinguish right from wrong and the courage to say it.

Majedi concluded: “I share your despise and indignation for the Islamic movement. But I denounce categorically the racism that is openly expressed by you.”

Frankly my dear! I don’t give a damn to what a commie thinks. You yourself are part of the problem and an obstacle in the way to democracy and peace. I see nothing wrong in religions. There is nothing wrong with Christianity, Hinduism or Buddhism. If an ideology is tolerant of other beliefs, that ideology needs to be respected. Freedom of faith is the essence of freedom. Islam, Nazism and communism are evil because they are intolerant. I will not ally with their proponents. I have tried hard to convince everyone that we must join hands together and stand firm against Islam. I have done my best to build bridges between all the religions and ideologies so we see each other as friends and not as enemies. To a great extent I have succeeded. If you look at the forum of FFI you’ll see people of all persuasions and beliefs talk together in harmony. We sometimes tease each other but we know that we are all part of one family, the family of mankind. But as it has become clear time and again, the communists have their own agenda. They are not with us. They will not hesitate to stab us in the back and undermine our efforts. We must make this distinction and tell apart our friends from our foes. Ms. Majedi’s desparaging of Oriana Fallaci, that godess of freedom, proves once again that communists cannot be trusted. They are not fighting on our side. They lie and deceive like Muslims and they take the side of Muslims anytime it suites them. Let us watch our backs and know our enemies.

United we stand, divided we fall.

[1] ROGERS CR (1980) Freedom to learn for the 80s New York : Free Press,

[2] FESTINGER L (1957) A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance Evanston , Ill. ; Row Peterson

[3] http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/dissonance.htm

[4] http://nowscape.com/atheism/Russell_What_is_an_Agnostic.htm