Islam is a genocidal totalitarian religion—let’s keep importing more of it

Jeff in England brings out what we might call the emerging neoconservative position on Islam. He writes:

Melanie Phillip’s diary entry for November 14, “The war within the West (3),” is one of her best pieces of writing ever, yet she still refuses to conclude that Muslim immigration must stop immediately. This, after insisting that it’s the faith itself to blame. She’s either totally blind, stupid, or so full of liberal guilt that she doesn’t know what she is doing. How can she write what she wrote and not conclude that Islam is incompatible with the West, so Muslims shouldn’t be allowed to enter the UK. Oh, yeah, page 283 of her book says different.

The woman has so much influence here in Britain and yet refuses to use it to stop Islamic immigration. And then has the gall to say you are misrepresenting her.

LA replies:

I agree with your general point, but this Diary entry is all about the Muslim war on Israel. Why would you expect immigration to play a role in this particular piece?

Jeff replies:

I know. It was her references to the fact that it is the faith (Islam) itself that is the problem. She says that “we damn well know where the problem lies: in genocidal religious totalitarianism.” She was referring to the Israel-Palestine problem but obviously if that faith (Islam) is the problem there we don’t want it here either. So she can write a brilliant entry based on the fact that Islam is a screwed up faith but not apply that point to here. Why can’t she: (1) directly attack Islam itself here as a genocidal totalitarian religion; (2)state that it is an undesirable religion for Britain; (3) conclude that immigration of this genocidal totalitarian religion must cease.

That’s why I want you to set up a symposium of Spencer, Melanie, Pipes, Hanson, etc and begin with the essential question of why they won’t declare that Islamic immigration to the West must halt now.

They have teased us with all the oppressive ideas and concepts within Islam and all the nasty things that Muslim culture is currently capable (both in the West and outside of it) of, yet they refuse to make this simple conclusion. I made a sexual jokey reference that it is like doing all the foreplay with no climax and I made it clear it was a joke. But now I think they may be playing a serious subconscious psycho-sexual game with their readers and listeners of flirtation without culmination. For reasons linked not only with their hidden guilt ridden liberal identities but with their psychosexual identities. They certainly need to be placed on a couch and psychoanalysed to save them from themselves and more importantly save us from their shoddy thinking.

Jeff continues:

In a blog entry at Jihad Watch this week, Robert Spencer talked of a moderate Muslim who had been an extremist in Egypt and now has condemned violent extremist Islam and is in hiding in the West. Once again the moderates are put forth by Spencer as the hope for Western society. Now, it’s not as if this person is violent at all, he’s not even one of those moderates who would support the Rushdie fatwa or the Cartoon condemnation. No, he is very decent and I’m sure would make a good neighbour. He has condemned Muslim behaviour more than most. OK, he has not condemned the Koran but that would be rare indeed. Anyway, I like the guy without having met him. But Spencer and Melanie and Pipes and Hanson and many others of their ilk must understand that I cannot risk the survival of Western society by letting Muslim immigration in the hope that most will be like him. We have seen the behaviour of many so called “moderate” Muslims in many situations and it is not compatible with living in the West. So we can’t take the risk of continuing Muslim immigration because some will turn out like Spencer’s example. I reiterate: I do not hate all Muslims by any means and some are incredibly nice. But letting Islam and Muslim culture grow here is equivalent a guaranteed nuclear time bomb no matter how nice Muslims are individually. This must be communicated to the mainstream, many of whose liberal instincts are repelled by “nastiness” or “hatred” towards any group in society, even if that group produces havoc of the greatest order.

Finally, I’m not forgetting the problems posed by the immigration of other groups (including Hispanics in the United States) but at the moment here in Europe especially, Muslims pose the greatest threat and we must concentrate on that.

LA adds:

I’m intrigued by Melanie Phillips’s choice of words, “genocidal religious totalitarianism.” At the first meeting of Jim Kalb’s traditionalist discussion group after the 9/11 attack, in a restaurant in downtown Manhattan, one of the participants, who had a good understanding of Islam, spoke about it at length. I summed up my understanding of his discourse thus: “Islam is a genocidal totalitarian tribalism.”

Since then, I’ve been persuaded that “totalitarian” is not quite a correct description of Islam, since Islam lacks the structure of a single leadership directing everything from the top. Also, since I object to the use of the modern political term “fascism” to describe the 1,400 year old religion of Islam, I ought to object to “totalitarianism” as well.

(Note: the next blog entry is something of a commentary on this one.) - end of initial entry -

BE writes:

Following up on Jeff’s comments, I’d like to point out that even Moslems who move here as small children can be dangerous. Witness the case of Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar, whom Michelle Malkin dubbed “the Tar Heel Terrorist” for his attacks on innocent civilians on the campus of the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill. For those who don’t recall, Taheri-azar, who moved here from Iran when he was 2 years old and is a US citizen, ran over 9 people in an SUV. Fortunately, no one was seriously injured, and he has been charged with multiple counts of attempted murder, so he is no longer a threat to our society—but how many more like him are there, waiting for their chance to slaughter the infidel?

“Snouck Hurgronje” writes:

Mohammed Bouyeri the assassin who killed Theo van Gogh was born in Amsterdam, in 1978. He had lived in The West all his life. These Muslims are a danger BECAUSE they regard the West as their home, as Bouyeri explained at length in the letter he left on Van Gogh’s body.

A reader writes:

Perhaps the reason that Melanie Phillips and others cannot bring themselves to oppose Muslim immigration is that they believe that would entail restricting all immigration. And as liberals (and in her case, as a Jew) they are committed to immigration in general for reasons which you have extensively discussed.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at November 16, 2006 06:12 PM | Send