Wednesday, March 15, 2006

Are We Winning the War Yet, Mommy?

I have in ten weeks learned more than enough about Islam to advance a number of logical, fact-based opinions about the Islamic challenge to modern civilization. So, let's begin.

Terrorist Recruitment

While infidel nations led by the United States can in some degree contain Islamic international terrorism through military action and diplomatic pressure they cannot by themselves end the threat of militant Islam. Behind every terrorist there is an imam and a mosque and more often than not the two are financially supported by Saudi Arabia. You cannot find a Muslim nation that will refuse the generous contribution of new mosque paid for by Saudi Arabia and staffed by a Muslim fanatic trained in Saudi Arabia.

Infidels can do absolutely nothing to contain the spread of Saudi Salafist Islam in the Muslim world. If the spread of militant Islam is to be contained or reversed in the Muslim world it is Muslims who must achieve that end. Inasmuch as the oil wealth of Iran and Saudi Arabia allows them to purchase influence in the corrupt governments of most Muslim nations we can expect militant Islam to become an increasingly powerful movement in the Muslim world. Almost all of some 57 Muslim nations are losing ground with respect to the spread of militant Islam. There is not a damn thing America or any other infidel nation can do to reverse this process.

The Myth of Assimilation

Muslim immigrant populations cannot be assimilated by an infidel host society. Islam forbids the marriage between Muslim women and infidel men. Muslim men may marry women who are "People of the Book" -- Jews and Christians -- with the understanding that all offspring of those marriages will be raised as Muslims. In this regard Muslims resemble Hasidic Jews and Amish Christians.

Intermarriage between different ethnic groups, religious faiths and races is the sine qua non of assimilation because it creates a vital common interest between otherwise exclusive groups. When an Eastern Orthodox Christian marries a Protestant both families are forced to find ways to interact and cooperate in the common cause of supporting their children and sharing their hoped for grandchildren. When a black Pentecostal person marries a white Presbyterian you can safely assume that both families will be in an uproar. They will then have to find a modus vivendi if they hope to share something that they both value. This, more than anything else, is secret of the successful American melting pot. Half of all Asian-Americans currently marry out of their ethnic groups. Half of American Jews marry someone who is not Jewish. The free selection of mates leads over the course of generations to a common American identity.

While Muslims can and do work hard and are, at least in America, self-sufficient and law-abiding they can never be assimilated. They will remain a self-contained and exclusive community incapable of joining others in a shared national identity. This is not a problem as long as they remain a relatively small and powerless minority. It is a catastrophe if significant political power becomes within their reach. Infidels are ill-treated and marginalized wherever Muslims hold political sway.


Most of Western Europe is in a demographic death spiral because of low birth rates. Lacking a common religious faith that can compete with Islam and sharing a common nihilistic philosophy much of Europe lacks a cultural immune system capable of resisting the infection of Islam. A few, small cohesive European nations with a strong sense of national identity may be able to resist the Muslim onslaught but the prospects are bleak for the UK, France, Germany, Italy and Spain. There is every reason to believe that much of Europe will become part of the Muslim world before this century ends.

The Missing Muslim Moderate

Militant Muslims will kill anyone who stands in their way. The same cannot be said of moderate Muslims. The violent and united few have almost always been able to impose their will on the peaceful and divided many. Moderate Muslims hide in the weeds and watch as their violent coreligionists engage in countless acts of barbarism out of a sense of self-preservation. Iran is a good example. Most of its very young population yearns for liberty and modernity. Nevertheless, they are unwilling to fight and die in order to liberate themselves from Islamic oppression. It is not difficult to imagine a modern Islamic empire, like the former Soviet empire, in which the brutal few are masters of the hapless many.

The Long View

The Muslim world is in the early stages of a major upheaval that will last for generations. In nations without oil wealth Islamism is a recipe for economic decline and that, in the end, may be the final antidote -- populations sick of suffering in the name of Islam. Few of us, if any, will live long enough to see the end of this.

Thursday, March 02, 2006

Islamic Evil

In the aftermath of 9/11 I set about learning more about Islam and tried to better understand the bizarre perversity that I had observed in Arabs for nearly half a century. The recent cartoon brouhaha pushed me over the edge and I impulsively and without any forethought whatsoever decided to fight back via a blog dedicated to Islamic evil.

In a few minutes I created a Blogger template and 15 post topics with no content. I chose a dark and brooding motif that echoed the colors of the Nazi flag. This, I think, was a fortunate choice as it heightened the impact of graphic imagery.

I soon found that I didn't know enough to write authoritatively on any aspect of Islam. I had a vague and general level of knowledge and that was nowhere near enough to do what I wanted to do. Content development and self-education ran in parallel. I now know Islam for what it is: a loathesome, primitive, oppressive, despotic, retrograde and barbarous creed.

Everyone with a blog that he or she hopes to be popular installs a hit counter. Most are hidden so as not to publically embarass the blogger. I boldly gambled with an unusual visible hit counter because I hoped to attract a respectable international audience and advertising that fact would increase my credibility. In retrospect I think that was a good decision.

I quickly found that there were a large number of anti-Islamic pages that had been fighting the good fight before I knew there was a good fight to be fought. I decided that I would compete with none of them. My blog would not be driven by daily events nor would it be focussed on a single aspect of Muslim nastiness. I would instead endeavor to create a concise, top-level crash course that would begin with the evil done in the name of Islam and work back to its causes. I would wherever possible avoid duplicating the fine work of others and, instead, invite attention to it.

I decided to interpose irreverant humor with serious discourse in order to punctuate narrative in the same way that some movies do. Some visitors enjoy this approach but I am not sure this was a good decision.

At every turn I followed my instincts and it is only now that I sit back and attempt to dispassionately analyze what I did and how I could make it better. While there is somewhat more to be done I am pleased with what I achieved. Although there is no search engine that will cough up my blog visitors still show up and their numbers are increasing daily.

I have devils sitting on each of my shoulders. One tells me to purge all personal observations and commentary from my blog in order to make it better. The other one tells me my blog is in some measure a personal statement and there is nothing wrong in personalizing it. They wrestle with each other every waking moment of every day but the contest remains a draw.

In any case, visit with the back-story in mind.

While I can find a feminist resource that deplores the patriarchal iconography of Frosty the Snowman (a carrot for a nose and all that) I have yet to find any objection on any American feminist website to the dreadful oppression of women burdened by the yoke of Muslim bondage. Female genital mutilation? They couldn't care less. They are a sick, morally bankrupt and vile band of harpies.

Nor could I find any page concerned with the nastiness of Islam that emanated from a left-wing source. Conservatives were outraged at the Muslim demand that they hold their tongues in accordance with Sharia law. The left didn't care a wit. While we can and should argue about means and ends anyone who dares to call him or herself an American should at least show some evidence of moral conscience. The hard left has instead jumped on the jihad bandwagon. But the hard left has always allied itself with those who would destroy most of us. I hoped that they would show some measure of decency in regard to Muslim aggression. That, it appears, was asking for too much.

Sunday, February 19, 2006

The Able Danger Story

The Department of Defense and various Clinton appointees are in full CYA mode as a congressional inquiry into the suppression of the Able Danger program continues. This story is far more important than Dick Cheney's hunting accident. It provides insight into how a careerist permanent Federal bureaucracy puts its interests before those of our nation. The antique media are, of course, ignoring the whole matter. Citizen reporters are taking up the slack. The Able Danger Blog provides one-stop shopping for a cover-up story that should make your blood boil.

Saturday, February 18, 2006

Vile, Offensive, Fatwa Worthy and Fun

Thursday, February 09, 2006

Origins of Islamic Terrorism

Hide your children and farm animals. This could get even uglier. offers nearly 300 titles devoted to Islamic terrorism while the press and Internet have been deluged with news reports, commentary and analysis. Much of it is misguided.

The teachings and practices of Islam have not changed in any significant way for centuries. So called "radical" or "fundamentalist" Islam is a myth as is "moderate" Islam. The only notable change in Islam over the last 1,000 years was a 13th century ruling of the Hanbali school of Muslim jurisprudence that allowed polytheists and idolators to become dhimmis (protected subject peoples) instead of being killed or enslaved. Islam today is no different from the Islam of 500 or more years ago. The difference between a peaceful Muslim and a Muslim terrorist is not one of religious doctrine. They do not interpet the Koran differently. They do not interpret the Hadith differently. They do not belong to different Islamic sects. It is the duty of every Muslim to make jihad against infidels until all infidels have been converted, killed, enslaved or subjugated. While Muslims may disagree on strategy and tactics they are in complete agreement on the desired outcome.

By the end of the 18th century it became clear to the rulers of the Ottoman Empire that they didn't have the means to successfully engage in warfare against European infidels. Islam was in retreat by the end of the 19th century and the subject peoples of Europe free from Muslim rule. With the collapse of the Ottoman Empire after WWI the last foreign provinces of the Muslim Turkish empire were subordinated to the rule of Britain and France. Muslims almost everywhere were ruled by Christians. Nevertheless, Muslims in the main did not revolt against colonial rule nor did they engage in acts of terrorism against infidels. Muslims worldwide were a despairing, weak, ignorant, helpless, impoverished people and recognized themselves as such. That all changed with the dismantling of British and French colonial empires in the aftermath of WWII.

The Muslim intelligentsia everywhere embraced nationalism and socialism as the panaceas that would lead them to wealth, power and modernity and their new national leaders as those who would clear the way. In every case they were betrayed by the corrupt, authoritarian regimes that became the norm in the Muslim world. Instead of catching up with the West, the nations of Islam fell ever further behind. Those Muslim nations with oil wealth could at least purchase abroad some of the amenities of modern civilization and in so doing create the appearance of modernity without it substance. The rest could look forward to endless squalor and permanent inferiority to the much more advanced nations of the West. Nevertheless, Muslims did not conduct jihad against the infidels they so greatly envied and profoundly resented. The utter failure of Muslim secular institutions was a source of great shame and hopelessness. This common feeling was nowhere more intense and insufferable than amongst the Arabs who in time would be thoroughly trounced by tiny Israel in four different wars.

Against this backdrop a number of important events would shape the perceptions of Muslims in general and Arabs in particular. Among them were the defeat of the French during the Algerian War of Liberation and in Indochina. To this we must add the American defeat in Vietnam and its poor showing in Lebanon and in dealing with American diplomatic personnel taken hostage during the Iranian revolution. The finishing touch was the defeat of the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. The once mighty had been brought low time and time again by relatively small and dedicated groups through unconventional warfare. This perception was reinforced by the success of Palestinian organizations that had successfully increased their power, political legitimacy and foreign revenues while conducting terrorist attacks on foreign infidel targets. Muslims once weak and powerless in the face of infidel military might now had a proven means for defeating it. Means alone were insufficient for Muslims to regain their long lost power and glory. They required a common purpose and for some that entailed looking no further than their religious faith.

The person primarily responsible for the creation of what is thought of as political Islam was Sayyid Qutb. He did not in any way reinterpret the Koran or Hadith. Instead he argued for the complete rejection of all infidel practices and institutional models that Muslims at various time and places had in some measure attempted to emulate. His critique of infidel practices and institutions was thorough, detailed and completely consistent with the teachings of Islam. He argued for the restoration of traditional Islamic society not because it would improve the material well-being of Muslims but because Allah created man to do his bidding on Earth. Sharia law is Allah's bidding and there is no other legitimate source of law.

Muslims who had lost faith in secular institutions copied from the West were provided a moral argument for rejecting them altogether. It was not Muslims who had failed at achieving modernity. Modernity itself was a revolting failure. This message was welcome to Muslims ashamed of the hopeless backwardness and squalor in which they and others like them lived. It was most welcome of all to Muslims with direct personal experience of the infidel West. Raphael Patai in his "The Arab Mind" writes eloquently and at length about the conflicting feelings of attraction and repulsion and envy and shame and superiority and inferiority that many if not most Muslim Arabs suffer when they directly compare the way infidel Westerners live and how their compatriots live. Qutb offers a path leading to a restored sense of honor and superiority to those traumatized by their experience of the West.

Once all Muslims were governed by Sharia law virtue and justice would prevail. While Qutb rejected Socialism his notions of political economy appear to be collectivist. He realized that one needs leadership and administration as well as laws to govern but makes no clear statement of how this combination might work in his perfect Islamic society. While advocating jihad he recognizes that where violence is impractical peaceful means must be found to advance the cause of Islam. The promotion of Islam must be both relentless and adaptable to circumstances. Qutb was not a terrorist. He was, instead, an idealistic Muslim apologist and revivalist. He was to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt what Marx is to communism.

Due to a lavishly funded effort by Saudi Arabia to spread its very traditional and orthodox form of Islam there was no shortage of fire-breathing, infidel-hating Muslim clerics in Muslim lands. Qutb provided the purpose while successful experience had shown the means. All that was left for Islamic international terrorism to flourish was funding and organization. Saudi and Iranian financing supplemented by Muslim charities abroad would provide the former. Osama bin Laden, an admirer of Qutb, would with the aid of others provide the latter.

For Islamism to flourish it was necessary for Muslim secular institutions to fail and they repeatedly and dismally did so to the shame and despair of many Muslims. For this, if for no other reason, America's attempt to create an Iraqi Muslim society with successful secular institutions is necessary. What much of the Muslim world lacks is an attractive, proven alternative to Islamism. Hope and a credible path to modernity that is consistent with Islam are the most powerful weapons we can use in the war against Islamism. If that doesn't work, we are faced with war without end.

For more information on Qutb during his 1949 sojourn in America go here. For a brief overview of his life and work go here. A long, scholarly dissertion on his life and works can be found here.

Wednesday, February 08, 2006

A Brief Service Interruption

The Muslim cartoon brouhaha pushed me over the edge and for the last week I have been at work on a blog named Islamic Evil. Check it out at I'll be back here when I am done there.

Wednesday, February 01, 2006


To the left is another of the cartoons that have the Muslim world in an uproar. I rather like it because it expresses Muhammed's misogyny and murderous nature. It was he who first ordered the assassination of those who dared ridicule him. I included it with the following email. If I have failed to contact a violent Islamic organization, please let me know. I would have none overlook me.

subject: Muhammed Cartoons

to: The leading Muslim terrorist group in Pakistan Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq Council on American-Islamic Relations Palestinian National Authority Saudi Arabian Government Libya's UN Delegation Iran's Foreign Ministry Hizbullah, The Party of God in Lebanon

cc: The Danish newspaper that published the cartoons

It has come to my attention that there are those of your faith who demand that infidels defer to your religion and do nothing to offend the religious sensibilities of Muslims. I am an American and as such I bend my knee for no master nor do I hold my tongue at the command of Muslims. Instead I have republished some of the Muhammed cartoons Muslims find offensive on my web log. You may find them at I will republish more in the future and I have encouraged others to do so as well. You now may demand that my government apologize for my impertenence in the futile hope that you will be taken seriously. You also may bring my conduct to the attention of one of your more murderous imams so that he can issue a fatwa calling for my death. I would sooner suffer the fate of Theo Van Gogh than be cowed by the likes of you. You will not rule me through fear nor through force of arms. I am an American.

Ken Lydell

Sent this day, February 1, in the year of our Lord 2006. May God have mercy for their benighted, heathen souls. Oops! I forgot for a moment that I am an atheist. There are times when I wish that was not so. This is one of them. Nevetheless, the deed it done.

God Bless the Danes!

The Muslim assault on the right to free speech enjoyed by the Danes is an outrage. I for one will express my support for the Danish people in three ways. I will immediately develop a taste for Havarti cheese and gorge myself on baby back ribs while drinking Tuborg beer in response to Thomas Lifson's appeal to buy Danish. I will also publish on this blog some of the Danish cartoons of Muhammed that have led to death threats and boycotts. And then I will email the embassies of those Muslim countries that have taken action against Denmark and invite their attention to what I have done. Some of you who value liberty may wish to follow suit.

The French newspaper France Soir has republished the Muhammed cartoons with this (machine translated) statement:

"France Soir denounces in the same way the intolerance of the "Moslem Brothers, Syria, Islamic Jihad, Ministers of Interior Department of the Arab countries, Islamic Conférence" who demand the "citizens of secular democratic societies, to condemn a dozen caricatures considered to be offensive for the islam".

"No, we will never excuse ourselves [the right] to free speech, to think, believe... Since these self-proclaimed doctors of the faith make a question of principle of it, it is necessary to be firm. Let us protest as much as it will be necessary to demonstrate that one has the right to caricature Mahomet, Jesus, Buddha, Jehovah and all the variations of theism. That is called the freedom of expression in a laic country ", affirms the leader-writer of the newspaper."

This expression of solidarity comes from an unexpected quarter. It is a noble example our own newsmedia should emulate. Newspapers in Spain and Germany are following suit. Europeans are showing more grit than I would have expected.

The cartoons in question may be found here. The server has been overwhelmed by page requests. Be patient.