Is a CounterJihad forming in the West?

Great Debates
1

Surfing around the web, it would seem that more and more people in the West are beginning to wake up to the fact that Islam is engaged in a world-wide jihad to bring abiout the world domination of their religion.

Interesting developments in the past few months have included the following:

CounterJihad Europa is one of many sites helping to build “Networks and Coalitions Against the Islamisation of Europe”.

One of their recent initiatives was the CounterJihad Brussels 2007 Conference, held October 18 - 19 was held in the European Parliament and Flemish Parliament buildings which provided necessary security (metal detectors, bag searches etc.) and secure meeting rooms for participants, may of whom are living under constant threat due to their publicly stated policy positions on Islamisation.

What is interesting is that the conference web page says that “Many groups who are vitally important to working against Islamisation in Europe were not invited. Sometimes it was for the simple reason that we don’t know about you - please email us and tell us what you do, so we can include you in future activities.”

This has all the earmarks of a growing grassroots movement of people who are waking up to what is happening and determined that the West will fight back.

Another interesting site is “Gates of Vienna”. This one uses a slightly lighter presentation although its message is deadly serious.

Another development in the last few days is the courage of the Danes in republishing the Motoons, in a daring reaffirmation that we in the West will NOT back down on our freedom of expression. In a world in which feeble apostles of dhimmitude like the present British Government are willing to EXTEND rather than abolish the blasphemy laws, to suit Muslim demands for repression of their critics, it is nice to see that some people still have balls.

Other interesting developments in the last few weeks:

In Calgary Alberta, Canada, political activist and publisherEzra Levant was being haled before the Alberta Human Rights Commission by Syed Soharwardy, a local Calgary Imam, for having printed the Mocartoons in the Western Standard.

Unfortunately for the Imam, Levant defended himself and his rights so vigourously that Soharwardy just a few days ago announced he was withdrawing the complaint.

“Over the two years that we have gone through the process, I understand that most Canadians see this as an issue of freedom of speech, that that principle is sacred and holy in our society,” declared Soharwardy, who is President of the Islamic Supreme Council of Canada.

The Muslim leader’s sudden conversion to western values seems to have more to do with the fact that the whole bloody PR exercise had blown up in his face. Levant was becoming a martyr and the real nature of Soharwardy and his Mosque (where charges of financial corruption have been flying) was being put under the public spotlight.

Also in Canada, Macleans Magazine is being haled before the Human Rights Commission because it printed an excerpt from “America Alone” by Mark Steyn. The article is entitled “The Future Belongs to Islam” and gives completely accurate information on the much higher birth rates of Muslims, and the decline of the west. Nobody has been able to show that anything in the article is untrue.

For example, it is perfectly true that in Linz, Austria, Muslim parents have been demanding that ALL teachers, even non-Muslims, should be obliged to wear the Hijab before they can teach their children. But the Human Rights Commission will go on with its process, which I predict will blow up in the faces of the Muslims pushing this, as people in the west begin to defend their freedoms.

Is it possible that the West is waking up?

2

Demographics will settle this.

The West’s declining birth rate leaves us in second place.

I said back in 97 that the US should open itself to as many Hong Kong citizens who were willing to come.

3

I just don’t know. Every American Muslim I have ever spoken to say that this whole jihad thing is a word/concept that’s been hijacked for the purposes of a small minority of radicals whom only garner so much attention because they have become so deadly and newsworthy.
One would assume that there have to be moderate Muslims in every Islamic nation that are only interested in their continued survival and the prosperity of their families and countries rather than concerning themselves with global Muslim dominance.

And now we have this counterjihad movement (which I was unaware of until now)…it all just seems a bit much.

OTOH, I certainly want the Western way of life in terms of democratic freedoms preserved, with extreme prejudice and violence if necessary, and that goes for ANY group or country that tries to deny “us” those freedoms, not specifically Muslims.

4

Lot of info in the post above, but the Linz incident was, from what I can tell, merely a letter sent by three fundie Muslim recent immigrant assholes - hardly a holy war that requires counter-action.

As for “the west”, well, over here we’ve got a request from the local imam for a once a week call to prayer from the minaret about 1/4 mile from my house being very vocally protested by the Bishop of Oxford, but on the other hand his boss is saying that some aspects of Shari’a in civil courts is “inevitable”.

I’d say that there is a tiny, tiny minority of Islamicist terrorists and agitators in the west who need to be locked up, a small minority of non-violent Muslim fundie assholes in the west whose opinions can be largely ignored, and a similar minority of hysterics exaggerating the threat to the west from Islam. Mentioning no names.

5

I forgot to mention an interesting bit of late-breaking news about the good Imam Syed Soharwardy. Apparently, not only did he withdraw Human Rights Commission complaint against Calgary Publisher Ezra Levant, but in an apparent attempt at damage control, he went to speak to the Editorial Board of the Calgary Herald.

Of course, it was a classic example of Muslim strategy. Nobody here but us democratic, freedom-loving Muslims, folks (just like the ones burning cars this week in Denmark because Danish political culture believes in Freedom of the Press).

But what the good Servant of Allah did not anticipate is that the Calgary Herald staff had done its homework and was ready for him. The article from the February 16 Herald shows how quickly he was unmasked by his own recorded statements made in the past.

For example, he states that he never advocated Sharia law for Canada. But his own statements in the media from 2004 clearly say: “Sharia cannot be customized for specific countries. These universal, divine laws are for all people of all countries for all times.” (emphasis added)

In the same column he also boasts: “I am one of the founding members of the Islamic Institute of Civil Justice. The mandate of the institute is to resolve disputes within existing Canadian laws by using the principles of conflict resolution from Islamic Law, or sharia.”

As the Calgary Herald states: “His column is clear. He wanted to bring sharia to Canada and even helped found the organization that spearheaded the drive to do so.”

Have you ever noticed that Muslims seem to do badly in debate? Is it because they are more used to a tradition that demands submission, punishes “heretics” and apostates with death, and generally puts more faith in violence and force than in debate and toleration of other viewpoints?

6

When you start out your argument with a faulty premise, of what use are the answers?

7

So you have evidence that there were an equal number of expressions of concern about Islam some 10 or 15 years ago? Because my premise is that it seems there is a growing wave of concern and a will to resist Islamization.

Do you have evidence of similar websites 10 years ago, in similar numbers? Was a conference like the Brussels Counterjihad conference of last October held 10 years ago?

Were there 50 million Muslims in Europe 10 years ago?

8

Exactly. “Surfing around the web” can net you anything you want, and is just about the worst method for finding out about the real world.

9

Perhaps you would care to look at what is being proposed in your own country (or perhaps the law has already passed?) that would not only preserve blasphemy laws that are a throwback to witch-hunting days and an affront to human dignity, but would also outlaw “blasphemy” against Islam, so that the Imam could get you as easily in London as in Saudi Arabia if you say something he doesn’t like about Islam.

Nobody ever accused the present Brit government of having balls!

10

So what are you doing here? Get out and find out about the real world. Go to a nice conference in Brussels and hear the speakets from a dozen countries concerned about the Islamization of their countries. Real people with real stories to tell. Real metal detectors and real security to keep these people from being murdered like Theo van Gogh, or the translators of the Satanic Verses. All of it very real, I assure you.

11

And how many Christian missionaries are there fanning out over the globe trying to bring about the “world domination” of their religion? Frankly, I think they are being more successful than the eeeevil Muslims you keep trying to get us to worry about.

12

If the facts are as you present them in this post, then in fact there’s no counter-jihad, but a capitulation. Make your mind up.

13

Cite?

Dude, have you ever actually met a muslim? If you have, did you spend your entire time hectoring them about their religion, like you do here?

14

This is the logical fallacy of offering a false choice (I believe it has another name in logic, but bear with me).

You seem to be saying that either the West is resisting or capitulating. Nothing in between. Obviously, it is not that simple. When France and Britain gave in to Hitler at Munich, appeasement was the order of the day. People like Churchill were called scare-mongers. Both resistance and capitulation existed.

I do not know for certain if the law extending the British laws on “blasphemy” to cover Islam has been passed, but if so, it is an example of capitulation and appeasement.

Obviously, in the 21st century, you do not pass laws against blasphemy to cover extra religions. You ABOLISH laws against blasphemy period, and you tell the Muslims (or the Anglicans or any other religion) that in a free, western democratic state, you do not make certain religious expressions of opinion criminal just because they offend someone else. Oliver Cromwell may have done so, but not Britons in the 21st century.

15

I think Muslim immigration has triggered questions of values that are very real issues in Europe at the moment, and it’s not surprising to see reactionary movements.

We in the US should probably pay a lot of attention, because I imagine we’ll be facing the same issues in a generation or so.

16

Ironic!

Do you mean the archaic one that is under consideration by the government for repeal? Yeah, I agree. Not before time. The Christians have been abusing it for way too long, and we don’t want the Muslims jumping on the bandwagon too.

I have to say, Valteron, that you do have a point. My buddy Ajud is meant to be taking me for a curry next week; I shall refuse to share a beer with him, and wave a placard instead. I am inspired. And next time I go for a smoke break with Zehara, the totally hot Pakistani chick I work with, I shall badger her about not pursuing jihad (unless she wants to pursue jihad in my pants).

Anyway, to answer your OP directly, clearly there is an anti-Islamist (some might argue anti-Islamic) movement in some western countries. Jolly well done for pointing that out!

17

In fact, I was friends with three Muslim guys (one an Iranian, one a Tunisianand one a Pakistani) here in Canada back in the 1970s when very few people in the west had met Muslims at all.

All three of them seemed very lukewarm to Islam. All of them had no probklem having beers with the other guys, for example. All of them said that they considered Islam nonsense and were glad to be rid of it here in Canada.

I cannot say I kept in touch with all of them over the last 25 years or so (you know how people drift apart) but I did recently meet one of them (the Tunisian). I noticed that he now referred to himself as a Muslim rather pointedly. When I asked if he had “found religion” he declared in hushed tones that he did not really believe, but that with the growth of the Muslim community and Islamic influence in Canada, he considered it wiser not to let his opinions show and declare himself a good Muslim.

By the way, the penalty under Sharia law for a Muslim leaving Islam is generally held to be death.

Of course, the Muslim leadership is not going to come right out and say that they want to be able to execute or otherwise punish Muslims who leave the faith in Canada.

They are smart enough to do it in stages. For example, look at this website. It is for those who want to introduce Sharia law into Canada.

Don’t you just love the part about how the “parties” would be completely free to choose Sharia law or Canadian law in their marriage disputes? Riiiigggghttt!!! :rolleyes:

Imagine a Muslim woman who wears a veil, does not speak English after 10 years in Canada, does not leave her home without a male relative with her, who is perhaps illiterate and cannot even look up legal aid in the phone book, who is going to stand up to the whole family and explain to them, and to the Canadian authorities, that she chooses Canadian law over Sharia law? SUUUUURRE! :rolleyes:

Besides, if two people want to keep a dispute out of the courts and settle it according to their own religious or cultural beliefs, there is NOTHING in any western law that prevents them from doing this right now, whether they are Christians, Jews or Muslims.

So what is the real point of the campaign to enshrine Sharia law in the west, if not as a Trojan Horse? In their 2,000 years of presence in the west, have Jews ever demanded that Rabbinic law be enshrined in the national law system?

18

Oh, goody. I wonder if Nathan Bedford Forrest, William Randolph Hearst, William J. Simmons, and G.G. Rupert could be brought back to life to head up these “counter” “movements”?

19

Nope. All I was saying is that your original premise

, was your usual paint-the-imagined-enemy with a broad-brush approach.

Islam is NOT “engaged in a world-wide jihad to bring about the world domination of their religion.”
Perhaps some nutjobs, who happen to be Muslim by birth, have this agenda.

20

Thanks for correcting me on that point, jjimm. I had read an article that said that Britain was going to EXTEND blasphemy laws to cover other religions. If you are simply abolishing existing blasphemy laws, I applaud you and your country!

Are you sure there is no other law being put in that would have the same effect, though, under a different name?

It is noteworthy that Muslim leaders in Britain have proposed extension of blasphemy laws rather than their abolition.

Your second point is irrelevant. The fact that you know hot Muslim chick is neither here nor there. Aery Neave, the British Officer who participated in the Nuremberg trials and wrote about them, was in his youth friends with a number of young German Nazis. Indeed, it was his knowledge of German acquired during stays in Hitlerian Germany in his youth that equipped him for his later work.

At one point, there were some five million members of the Nazi party. I very much doubt if you could not have found HUGE numbers of card-carrying Nazis who were decent, likeable sorts.

And no, I doubt if Neave ever hectored and harassed his German hosts about the evils of Naziism.

But a judgment about NAZIISM is not changed because of some individual Nazis.