Islamization of Europe and Policies to Prevent It, Part 9
21 Aug, 2007
POLICY AREA 12: SECURITY POLICY PART C
Parts:
A 12.1 BACKGROUND
A 12.2 CERTAIN GOALS FOR A NEW EUROPEAN FOREIGN POLICY
B 12.3 MORE ABOUT GOALS AND POLICIES
C 12.4 Certain goals for an European security policy
C 12.5 POLICIES NECESSARY TO REALIZE THE GOALS IN 12.4
D 12.6 THE ENDGAME: NEVER AGAIN
12.4 CERTAIN GOALS FOR AN EUROPEAN SECURITY POLICY
12.4.1 The Great Civil War in Europe
The conflicts between islamists and other followers of
traditional islam, which is the real islam, and non-muslims in
various countries in Europe, grew during the first decades of the
21st century. The larger the muslim parts of the populations grew in
various countries, the more radicalized (in this case: true to its
doctrine) they became. No effective policies prevented that parallel
muslim societies became strong in different parts of Europe, and
forced the governments to make many concessions and give privileges
to islamists. The political development in Europe therefore followed
the process described in Part 1. The way in which individual
governments made themselves free of the restrictions put on them by
EU and its administration, was described in sect.12.3 p.14.
After decades of protests and demonstrations, a number of violent
acts against political adversaries including murders of political
opponents, developed into frequent physical fights between islamists
vs police and private militias, and later into firefights. The
frequency of terrorist acts against the general non-muslim
population increased. In some countries, this phase E (or ph. 5) of
the islamisation process of Europe led to armed insurrections (phase
F (also called ph. 6)) which grow organically from the
demonstrations, conflicts, fights and terrorist acts. After a
period, even heavy weapons were used, and the fights between
islamists and the military and other forces soon developed into
regular civil wars (phase G (also called ph. 7)).
In the countries where this occurred, city after city were partly
(or mostly) destroyed in the fighting. During the conflicts, it was
discovered that the concentration of muslims to certain larger
cities, and there often to parts of the cities, was a blessing. Few
wars have been won by mainly occupying cities - by static forces -
with few industries and no natural supply of food or other necessary
resources. The fighting rapidly became very brutal, and a hundred
Fallujahs appeared in Europe. The civil wars in various countries
were extremely violent and cruel, and the destruction of the cities
severe, when block after block had to be reconquered by the
Europeans.
In a few countries where socialists/social democrats and social
liberals still held power despite electoral setbacks, the weak
reactions of the governments led to the islamists gaining ground.
This caused the governments to fall, and
conservative/nationalist/classical liberal/libertarian parties took
over the political power. However, at that stage these had – like
the French government after Dunkirk in 1940 - great difficulties to
stabilize the military situation, and it could be done only at a
great cost in human lives. The larger parts of these countries were
taken over by islamists.
But in other countries, the strategic and tactical situation of
the islamists generally deteriorated slowly after some months of
fighting, and specially when regular European military forces were
mobilized and trained. The shortage of heavy weapons and regular
military knowledge of the islamists were only two factors. Their
strategic and tactical thinking was often inadequate and couldn't
compensate for a number of weaknesses of the muslim forces. The
solidarity between most European nations was now strong; help was
given by a number of countries with better domestic political
situations; and in the end also American troops helped to crush the
islamists. The American troops were specially helpful in countries
where the islamists had nearly taken over the political power
because of the weaknesses and mistakes of earlier governments. The
help from muslim countries to the islamists was also often prevented
to reach them thanks to the American forces surrounding Europe. An
iron ring protected Europe against interventions from the outside.
The centers of resistance were systematically attacked and
subdued but it took much longer for the European forces to reconquer
cities than for the American Marine Corps to conquer Fallujah in
2004. As a matter of fact, the tempo of the fighting, the treatment
of prisoners etc hade many more similarities to the fight for
Tammerfors in March-April 1918 (during the Finnish civil war) than
to Fallujah in 2004. And the worse the atrocities carried out by the
islamists became, and the longer the fighting continued, the more
radicalized became the European population. As always, civil wars
cause the most intense hatred between the parts of the population
which fight each other.
Granada II
Soon after the first outbreak of hostilities between the Home
Guard plus army units and the islamists, slogans like “ Granada II”,
“Granada, not Palestine” were heard. They became more and more
common and were soon incorporated among the goals of many non-muslim
political organizations and parties. The people saying e g “Granada,
not Palestine” had realized that the European policy regarding PLO
and the Palestinian refugees during more than half a century had in
reality only led to the preservation of a problem, and not to any
kind of solution. No similar destructive so-called peace process
could ever be accepted in Europe between muslims and non-muslims.
The European public had at that point of time also understood the
islamic policy of “hudna”, a method – a truce for a while - used when islamists are weak, so they can regain their strength and then again
fight for the islamisation of Europe. The socialists/social democrats
and social liberals could not explain to the public why such a
privilege should be given to islamists when these were weak. Most
people understood that it was important to crush them when they had
become weak, in order to be able to solve the problem for ever. So
these slogans could be heard from the lips of an ever increasing
number of Europeans. But other – less drastic - solutions were
naturally also formulated.
Contributing reasons
A number of factors contributed to the dramatic radicalization of
the attitudes of the European electorate. The fact that the dislike
by the Europeans of the activities of many muslims had been
suppressed by various laws for so long, led to a special intensity
in the hatred of the islamists. The contempt and disgust for so many
islamist thoughts, actions and rules had hardened during the earlier
decades, and suddenly people were allowed to show what they really
thought. The large number of terrorist acts during the earlier
decades, and the atrocities during the armed insurrections and the
civil wars in various countries, had also exhausted the patience of
the tolerant European citizens.
The refusal of so many of the so-called mainstream, or moderate,
muslims, to accept any kind of responsibility for the muslims
following what was said to be another interpretation of islam –
political islam/islamism - and the general unwillingness of muslims
to help the police and intelligence services to identify and find
islamists, had revealed the emptiness of the claim that islam
basically is a religion of peace and tolerance. Many moderate
muslims just felt unable to act against islamists who, regarding so
many issues, in reality have the full weight of the islamic doctrine
behind them. To be a moderate muslim was in many cases revealed to
be just a cultural habit easily discarded if the faith of the person
for any reason became stronger. That many muslims didn´t act as
citizens, instead of being passive or active allies of the
terrorists, was more damaging to the cause of islam in Europe than
anything else.
Most people had during the earlier decades also understood the
method to argue that the islamists and many other muslims employ,
and how these rules are used in all discussions and dialogues with
non-muslims. So e g a favorite method like the role of a victim of
the brutal actions by non-muslims was no longer credible to
Europeans. People understood that these muslims were instead victims
of their own often primitive values and their interpretation of the
religious doctrine.
The growing understanding that the fight for islam also – to a
considerable extent – was a fight for the goals of an Arab
imperialism aiming at the domination of Europe using islamification
as a method, also mobilized the Europeans.
12.4.2 Goals for a successful security policy
12.4.2.1 A basic goal
Every European shall understand that every act of islamic
terrorism in European countries is a proof of the failure of the
immigration and integration policies of the earlier – and current –
socialist/socialdemocratic and social liberal governments. The
parties of social liberalism och socialdemocracy have clearly shown
what their true values are i e that they lack the important values
which make it mandatory to protect the European populations against
all threats including religious ones. Their refusal also to respond
effectively to the islamification efforts by muslim organizations is
unforgivable.
These governing parties have – because of their ideology/dislike
of the market economy/dogmatism/a special interpretation of
multiculturalism - put Europe and the European civilization in an
extreme danger. And when the catastrophic consequences started to
appear in various countries, the national and local governments
tried to suppress the reactions of their European citizens by
curtailing their human rights like freedom of expression (disguised
as laws against hate speech), freedom of assembly e g the planned
large antiislamist demonstration in Brussels 070911. But every
suppression of the political rights of Europeans is another proof of
the shipwreck of the policies formulated by political establishments
in many countries. These politicians tried to conceal that they had
not told the truth to their peoples about the many serious
consequences of the mass-immigration of muslims. All these
repressive measures were only selfserving measures intended to
conceal the pending catastrophe, when it appeared more and more
likely.
The political parties which are responsible for these policies,
have committed such mistakes owing to fundamental errors in their
ideologies and approach to politics, that they can never again be
trusted with the power to influence the political directions of the
nations of Europe. To make the European population understand this
basic fact, and how these parties compromised the European security,
is now not only a political goal but in reality a true national
security goal. The irresponsibility of these parties have put the
European continent into an extreme danger threatening the political
and cultural, and therefore even the national survival of many
countries.
12.4.2.2 To fight against Arab imperialism
disguised as a religion
Why the islamist and traditional interpretation of real islam
must be fought has been explained earlier. But islam is - besides a
religion – also the weapon of an Arab imperialism realizing the
goals of Arab political organizations/parties, and also some
governments e g Saudi Arabia. It is the basic motivation of many
muslims who don't take the religious aspects of islam very
seriously. They have understood that their religion is basically a
method to conquer other countries, and that the religious aspects
are highly useful to reach this goal.
This explains what so many Europeans cannot understand: Why many
muslims who individually seem moderate from a religious
point-of-view, anyway support the islamists? It is not only the
fact that the islamic doctrine regarding so many matters supports
the islamists - and not the moderates (and the moderates know
that!). These so-called moderates understand the enormous advantages
of belonging to a movement that takes over the power in an advanced
society. Muslims can then by various methods e g force, special
taxation etc exploit the property and riches of the non-muslims. One
consequence is then that just moderation in belief doesn't
necessarily diminish the desire of muslims living in the west to
participate in taking over a country using islam as a method.
Non-religious, economic aspects are also important.
This Arab imperialism threatens the national cultures,
institutions, and habits of many nations. The newly converted
European muslim shall take a new – Arabic – name; according to islam
he ought to limit his contacts with his non-muslim family and
earlier friends (in the way sects generally demand); Allah talks
Arabic, which therefore is the language every muslim should learn
for religious reasons. The religious ceremonies are performed in
Arabic, and also in Paradise only Arabic is spoken. The muslim shall
bow towards Arabia five times per day, and even in death his/her
body must be turned towards Arabia (Mecca). (1)
A number of factors lead to the result that Europeans who convert, will sacrifice their own culture for the Arabian one. To earn religious points in order to be able to go to Paradise, a convert must live like an arab, and love Arabia. It has been pointed out that Muhammad's role as an ideal model of muslim behavior is a fundamental cause of Arab cultural imperialism. If the convert shall behave in the correct manner, he/she shall imitate Muhammad. That means that his own culture is abandoned, and the Arabian culture is accepted:
…one must think, feel and act as the Prophet did; one must develop the same tastes and habits as the Prophet had; one must even eat, drink, talk, walk, sleep and look like him in dress and general appearance...
The fundamental principle of Islam is…to perpetuate itself
through a permanent strife based on the distinction of…(the Muslim)
and… (the non-Muslim)…. it becomes the duty of all converts to Islam
that they... subordinate all their national institutions to those of
Arabia, adopt Islamic law, learn Arabic and Arab manners; love Mecca
and Arabs, to acknowledge Muhammad as the Model of Behavior because
being an Arab he loved and enforced everything that was Arabian.
Still worse, they must hate their own culture and motherland to such
an extent that it becomes Dar-ul-Harb, i.e. a living battlefield. In
practice it means that they must set up an opposite camp in their
own motherland and fight their own countrymen until they all
surrender … …by embracing Islam. It is then and only then that the
country becomes Dar-ul-Islam i.e. the Land of Peace; otherwise it
remains a battlefield (Dar-ul-Harb) ….These non-Arab Muslims develop
a special sense of contempt for their own cultures and motherlands
under the pretence of believing in the Muslim nationhood… (2),
When all aspects are added up, the Arab imperialistic character
of the religion is overwhelming. Arabian culture and habits slowly
strangle the local cultures in the countries, where Arab immigrants
have become numerous or islam strong.
And what is then the final, ideal political result of a global
islamic victory (a result that shall then last for all the future of
mankind) ? Well, in the future perfect islamic society and the
perfect muslim world-state which all muslims shall work for, one
kaliph - a dictator – governs over the world. Democracy is
eliminated. The kaliph shall be an arab, and ideally even come from
a certain Arab tribe in Saudi Arabia.
This is the worst kind of political and cultural imperialism. To
withstand this type of invasion disguised as a global religion, is a
vital condition for the survival of Europe.
12.4.2.3 Important goals for a security policy
Some general security goals of the European nations follow from
the basic foreign policy goals expressed in sect. 12.2. We will not
treat the more specific and detailed security goals but will limit
the discussion here to the basic – but in the long run most
important - goals which must form the backbone of a security policy
regarding a Europe where human rights are respected.
The violations of the human rights of individuals – muslims or
non-muslims - caused by the real, traditional interpretation of
islam, also have as a purpose to undermine the western society, and
pave the way for an islamic society. These crimes can therefore be
viewed as a part of the warfare against the non-muslim society and
similar in their longterm a i m to terrorist attacks and military
resistance. A resolute defense of freedom and the human rights of
every resident – muslim or non-muslim - is therefore necessary, and
seen as part of a broadly defined security policy.
The rules and policies against: (a) violations (caused by the
religion) of the human rights of family members, (b) non-physical
religious hate crimes (see Policy Area 4), (c) crimes against
integration (Policy Area 6), or (d) against sexual equality in order
to uphold sexual apartheid (Policy Area 3), belong to the soft part
of a broad security policy (SP Part I). Physical attacks against
property or people caused by religious considerations, terrorist
acts, and military insurrections belong to activities which form the
hard part of the security policy (SP Part II).
For example, religiously based (or accepted) crimes against
muslims – often family members – allow the islamists to counter
integration attempts and keep a parallel society (muslims following
a muslim agenda and sharia rules, and not western law) intact and
therefore as a resource, or weapon, to be used against the secular
state. The effects of e g honour killings are – besides upholding a
primitive and at the same time childish honour concept ― to preserve
the power of men over women and by that an important part of the
profound collectivism of the Islamic society with few individual
rights. Honour murders are also political statements. There are good
reasons to see such acts as part of the islamisation efforts of
muslims in Europe, and politically different in kind but not in aim,
to terrorism and insurrections.
An unconditional defense of human rights in all nations of Europe
is therefore part of a broad security policy. A proactive
zero-tolerance policy regarding all violations of human rights in
European countries and with the main attention directed to such
violations by muslims, shall be realized by the full force of the
state. It constitutes part I of the security policy (also see 12.2
p.3A). Religious hate crimes (see Policy Area 4), crimes against
integration (see Policy Area 6: sect.2) and also crimes aiming at
upholding sexual apartheid according to muslim rules (see Part 2:
sect 4.3), shall be specially observed.
The muslim clergy is vital to the islamist movement. Khomeini was right when he said that without the support of a committed clergy, the islamic revolution will weaken, or – in the long run - even disappear. The efforts of mullahs are important in Europe in order to build parallel societies and resist integration. All people who fulfill priestly or supporting functions in muslim mosques in Europe must therefore be given attention and have their behaviour controlled.
All religious hate crimes by mullahs must be observed and later punished. A number of religious hate crimes were discussed in Part 4 (Policy Area 4). The measures proposed in 12.3 p.10-11 regarding the muslim clergy are important. However, religious hate crimes against human rights are committed by many people, and are the backbone of the efforts to counteract integration and keep parallel societies functioning in Europe. The earlier stated goal is also a security one: “No parallel societies shall be allowed in any European country” (see 12.2 p.2.4). Without such societies, islamism will be drastically weakened. Elimination of all religious hate crimes against human rights in Europe is a specially important part of the proactive zero-tolerance policy mentioned above.
Some goals concerning the hard part of the security policy (SP
Part II) are:
1. Elimination of all major causes of islamism, terrorist acts
and armed insurrections in Europe. Arguments saying that terrorism
is caused by factors like the Western policy regarding Israel, are
generally untrue. It has been pointed out that it is not because of
what we do, but because of whom we are, that western democracies and
citizens are hated by muslims.
A number of extremely important aspects must then be treated and
decided upon. The issue of immigration naturally has major weight.
Immigration cannot any longer be allowed to create national security
risks in Europe. Considerable changes in today´s immigration
policies are necessary (see 12.2 p.9 and 12.3 p.10), and these will
be treated in Policy Area 8.
If one speaks about major causes, a basic issue regards the
motivation of islamists. To weaken that motivation is to take away
the fuel from islamists, and in reality nothing is more important
from a security point-of-view than that. It is then of interest to
the European nations that the main psychological pillars of islamism,
which drive the terrorists to act, are – if not destroyed - at least
weakened. The main motivational factors shall therefore be
identified, and – if possible – their power eliminated.
This demands that the state is allowed to critizise various
aspects of a religion e g that suicide bombers will be rewarded by
going to the Paradise. The state can do that as long as the reason
is not to support any specific religion but that an interpretation
of a specific religion causes numerous crimes against human rights
and political freedom. A policy regarding the core elements of the
islamist faith which are of importance for the violent behaviour of
islamists, is formulated and carried out.
Let´s just take an example of another general motivational
factor. A powerful reason for many men to support islamism is that
this ideology fights for k e e p i n g w o m e n o p p r e s s e d
in order to function as servants to men. Without women to dominate
and kept as servants and second class citizens, the reason and
motivation even to be a muslim is much weaker. Women who fulfill the
subservient role chosen for them according to the gender apartheid
rules, make men´s life infinitely easier. What this role means is e
g that a man can get a wife without having to show any personal
qualities impressing the woman. Just by fulfilling something similar
to a business transaction, he will have a subservient and docile
servant who even gives him sexual gratification, and in any way he
wants because she has no right to object. And if the male chooses
not to help the wife with anything at home, that is also correct aso.
The male´s whole personal life is influenced by these gender
apartheid rules which many (most ?) muslim men approve of. To
preserve gender apartheid is then an extremely important
motivational factor for followers of islamists, and specially young
men. Even if they have horrible personalities without any good
qualities, they can still get married to an obedient female servant.
Many male muslims know that their whole life style is threatened by
the western laws and therefore they want to stop the process of
female emancipation. As long as that seems possible, some will
support islamists.
However, if it doesn´t seem possible to prevent female
emancipation any longer, their attitude and support may well change
because this stand may then cost too much. Female emancipation also
changes women from servants and second-class persons to independent
individuals who can make individual choices – and therefore perhaps
even decide to fight against islamists (or at least not support
them). It is for many reasons a national security goal to make
muslim women equal to men in all practical aspects. The proactive
zero-tolerance policy regarding e g all crimes against integration
and religious hate crimes supporting gender apartheid, is necessary
also from this point-of-view. Freer and more independent women will
be an important factor in eliminating parallel societies, and
diminishing the power basis of the islamists. In this respect, soft
policy is hard policy.
2. Those parts of the islamic doctrine which are contrary to UDHR,
and to the constitution of the specific country and its bill of
rights, are a threat to a peaceful society. They shall be declared
unlawful and therefore not relevant, and shall not be allowed to be
taught or used in any religious messages, sermons, and other
religious activities etc. The political consequences of the fact
that islam is a religion very different from all other important
religions, and that many of its theses cannot be respected, shall be
drawn. The issue if traditional islam is a sect must be thoroughly
examined.
3. The intelligence-, police- and military capacity (the national
protection forces) where a volunteer Home Guard will play a key role
(see 12.4.3), will be heavily expanded.
4. An intense cooperation between nations regarding security and
military matters using mechanisms that – in all probability - are
not under the control of EU (see 12.2 p.8 and 12.3 p.13) is
necessary. Governments with similar opinions cooperate continously
and realize a forceful anti-islamist security and military agenda in
Europe. The legal changes necessary for the future conflict were
described in sect 12.3 p.16.
5. Satisfactory intelligence regarding all organizations where
islamists may be active must be collected by the state, and by all
available means. Infiltration of such organizations shall be carried
out wherever it is possible and cost-effective ( also see 12.3
p.15).
6. Strong and continous efforts to weaken the ability of all organizations, influenced by islamists, to support and/or carry out acts of terrorism, or take part in military insurrections. Using the traditional enmity between certain islamic groups/nationalities may be one possible method.
7. No European nation shall agree to that “one square centimeter of European soil shall be allowed to be under the sovereignty of political Islam….. there shall be no “no-go” areas in Europe” (see12.2 p 2.3). This regards dominance by non-elected organizations.
Even if a government of islamists was elected, it would soon break the law by violating the constitutional rights of individuals, and would then in practice be illegal. But such parties with a religious agenda that goes against the UDHR or the constitution of the country, shall not be allowed to take part in elections (see Policy Area 4).
8. Another goal for the European nations is to support - by all
necessary resources - any European country threatened and attacked
by islamists, according to the principle “One for all, all for one”
(see 12.2 p. 2.2).
9. One principle guiding the security or military response to e g
armed insurrections is that a proportionate response is an extremely
faulty and dangerous principle. It just allows the adversary to
survive, and keeps the problem alive. The best principle is often
owerwhelming force if such a response can be arranged. Just the
speed that this approach causes, saves many lives in itself.
Another principle is that the lives of the European soldiers and
citizens which support the government, shall be protected maximally.
That principle has definite consequences for the rules of
engagement, and for tactical military decisions.
10. All other, often more detailed and technical, security goals.
12.4.3 The National Protection Forces
The period of reduced national resources committed to defense or
national security has now ended. Owing to the betrayal by the
socialist/socialdemocratic and social liberal governments of the
security of the European nations, these must now commit vastly
increased resources for intelligence, internal security and national
defense. Without that betrayal, many relevant grants could still be
held rather low. But e g a larger court system, a considerable
larger prison capacity, a larger police force, increased budgets for
internal security, increased resources aimed at suppressing
terrorist acts, a larger army a s o is a considerable drain on
national resources (besides all types of support payments and social
welfare costs for such immigrants who are a menace). These expenses
would have been unnecessary with a sensible immigration/integration
policy.
Increased resources are now necessary for:
1. Intelligence/security organizations
2. The local and national police forces
3. A drastically expanded Home Guard force
4. The army
One of more nations also ought to build a European Protection Force (see below).
The local Home Guard
A volunteer local/regional Home Guard shall now form a much
larger part of the total National Protection Forces. This expanded
Home Guard shall be able to effectively control the local
communities - or even regions – where it is located, against any
armed activities of islamists, and if necessary suppress any
rebellion by force. Budgetwise, it means a dramatically increased
force, increased compensation for officers and the soldiers; more
and better training; better and heavier equipment, personal
protection vests and equipment to fight in darkness etc. Because of
their increased responsibilities, a permanent officer corps with
better and longer education, and a larger Home Guard administration,
is necessary.
The Home Guard shall permanently be ready to act against all
kinds of threats. When the threats are eliminated, the soldiers go
back home. Such units will make private anti-islamist militias much
less probable. Private militias will otherwise form spontaneously
when the conflicts in the society and the terrorist attacks
increase.
The National Home Guard
A special part of the Home Guard shall be equipped with heavy
weapons and have a mobile capacity. These units shall be able to
operate over the whole country and support those local Home Guard
forces which meet special problems. Together with the local Home
Guard, they shall be able to reconquer whole communities which have
been taken over by islamist forces. These heavy units are given
special training. Also these soldiers are all volunteers and they
function as soldiers a certain number of hours per month. When a
crisis has occurred, they have the right to leave their jobs, become
full-time soldiers and are paid for that dangerous work to protect
the nation.
This part of the Home Guard is called the National Home Guard (NHG)
in contrast to the ordinary Home Guard which has local or regional
duties.
The national army
At a suitable point-of-time during the islamisation process in a
country, conscription shall be introduced, if it has earlier been
eliminated. Military training of young people leaving school will
then start again. Refresher training of earlier trained persons
shall also be common again. When the fighting has started, a
selective mobilization of men under 50 and who are not engaged in
the Home Guard, is carried out.
The Home Guard is an all volunteer force, which train together
during brief periods but during a long period of time, and have an
extraordinary local knowledge. The units can be mobilized in
sometimes less than a day, and they step down immediately the danger
is over. The infantry in the army has distinct weaknesses in these
respects but has other large advantages e g longer continuous
training, regular support of heavier weapons (armour, artillery etc)
and training in large units together with other arms including the Air
Force. The longer a civil war will last, the more important will the
conventional army become.
A European Protection Force
One or two European nations shall organize a European Protection
Force (EPF) consisting of volunteers from any nation in the world.
The enlisted men in EPF will consist of trained soldiers, or just
untrained volunteers interested in becoming soldiers and protecting
freedom and democracy in Europe from internal threats. They shall be
paid a low salary, and the units shall be under a very strict
discipline. They shall be able to fight anywhere in Europe. The aim
is to create an elite force with weapons that allow it to reconquer
and dominate any community or region in Europe, which is under
attack, or has been conquered, by islamists. Because of their
extremely high motivation, background and training, these
professional soldiers can be exposed to any hardships and dangers in
their fight to preserve freedom in Europe. They shall be able to
form the vanguard in every fight against islamists, as long as
regular national army units are not available.
Such units can be created just for the need of one country but it
is desirable and advantageous from the viewpoint of
economies-of-scale if a larger force is trained in one place but –
if needed – can work everywhere in Europe. For that reason, the
nation that creates this force shall let other nations contribute to
the financing of it, and some may be willing to do just that just as
a national insurance premium. At the request of a specific
government, (part of) the force is lent out to that country. Its
goal is then to help that government to prevent or suppress any
islamist uprisings there, and to assist in tracking down and
apprehending all islamists in a region. While these units then are
under the command of the military representatives for the government
of the specific country, they will fight as separate units, and
under their own officers.
This capacity will be of considerable help to any government which tries to fulfill the goals of not allowing even one square centimeter of European soil to be under the sovereignty of political islam, or assisting in eliminating armed rebellions etc caused by e g the refusal of the islamists to dissolve various parts of a parallel society in a country.
________________________
(1) http://islam-watch.org/AnwarSheikh/Islam-Arab-Imperialism7.htm
(2) http://islam-watch.org/AnwarSheikh/Islam-Arab-Imperialism7.htm
>>> Continued to Part 10
If you like this essay: |
Stumble it
![]() |
digg it |
vbv
Tuesday August 21, 2007
03:16:23 -0700
The whiteman reaps what he has sown.In the colonial era i.e. prior to the 1950s they found common cause with the muslims, as co-monotheist in religion , disdaining others as polytheists (Hinduism) or atheists (Budhism/Jainism), sympathised with them, instigated and incited them for a seperate muslim nation from India. They gleefully stoked the fires and dismembered this country. Well ,polytheists are also reasonable and secular people didn't go too well with their narrow mindsets. The europeans generally disparaged Indian history as 'no history' and our culture as backward. The arrogance of power blinded them and consistently supported ,until recently, the so-called Kashmir 'cause' in favour of Pakistan (of course till they realised that Pakistan was deeply involved in exporting islamic fundamentalism/terrorism to the West). Islamic nations by nature of their creed are backstabbers and cut-throats, they will have no compunction to bite the hands that feed them (the case of Afghan mujahids who fought the USSR occupation, along with the muslims of other countries ,including Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Egypt, Sudan, Somalia, etc. the list goes on). Both the West and the islamic countries are equally amoral and culpable for the present world scenario. Opposition to islamic fundamentalism, fanaticism and terrorism can come effectively only from countries such as Russia, China, Japan India (if our secular politicians become truly secular), Thailand, Nepal, Vietnam, Korea and maybe Australia. I wont be surprised that one day Europe and USA become a colony of Saudi Arabia, carrying the jihad to the rest of the world and bring destruction to the entire humanity, perhaps the prospect of full-scale nuclear war is not farfetched with a rabid creed called islam flourishing in the near future! Of course there is a brighter side to it also, Darwin's evolution being a scientific fact, new species would evolve, perhaps sans religion!
mel tal
Friday February 27, 2009
04:24:42 -0500
the threat and danger of islam, radical or not, is clear from this article. the main problem, i think, is not that people are unaware of the horrors of islam but they have no real motivation in doing something about the fight against the dictatorships and fascism islam creates, always with the appearance of being victimized and weak, especially by jews. in history the jews have been scapegoated always because of their individualitic and freedom loving character as well as their intelligence as a people. but the article is an excellent start and should be promoted more throughout the world. i think at the essay should especially reach the highest political echelons who have not been up to now poisoned by the money and propaganda of the arabs and islamists.