Please Help New English Review
New English Review
New English Review Facebook Group
Follow New English Review On Twitter
Recent Publications by New English Review Authors
Mohammed and Charlemagne Revisited: The History of a Controversy
Emmet Scott
Why the West is Best: A Muslim Apostate's Defense of Liberal Democracy
Ibn Warraq
Anything Goes
by Theodore Dalrymple
Karimi Hotel
De Nidra Poller
The Left is Seldom Right
by Norman Berdichevsky
Allah is Dead: Why Islam is Not a Religion
by Rebecca Bynum
Virgins? What Virgins?: And Other Essays
by Ibn Warraq
An Introduction to Danish Culture
by Norman Berdichevsky
The New Vichy Syndrome:
by Theodore Dalrymple
Jihad and Genocide
by Richard L. Rubenstein
Second Opinion
by Theodore Dalrymple
Not With a Bang But a Whimper: The Politics and Culture of Decline
by Theodore Dalrymple
In Praise of Prejudice: The Necessity of Preconceived Ideas
by Theodore Dalrymple
Defending The West:
by Ibn Warraq
Nations, Language and Citizenship:
by Norman Berdichevsky
Romancing Opiates
by Theodore Dalrymple
Which Koran?
by Ibn Warraq
Our Culture, What's Left of It
by Theodore Dalrymple
What The Koran Really Says
by Ibn Warraq
Life at the Bottom
by Theodore Dalrymple
The Origins of the Koran
by Ibn Warraq
Why I Am Not Muslim
by Ibn Warraq
Spanish Vignettes: An Offbeat Look Into Spain's Culture, Society & History
by Norman Berdichevsky
Leaving Islam
Edited by Ibn Warraq
The Danish-German Border Dispute, 1815-2001: Aspects of Cultural and Demographic Politics
by Norman Berdichevsky
What's Love Got to Do with It?: Emotions and Relationships in Pop Songs
by Thomas J. Scheff

Thursday, 9 September 2010
This Is Where We Begin to Say No - Andrew C. McCarthy
The tide is turning in America. It really looks like it.

All the elite leaders who have been pandering to Islam are starting to expose themselves for what they are.

All the perpetual dialoguers, the Inter-Faithers and peace, peace, peacers apparently will never stop, unless the general public stops them. 

All these twits, these extremely dangerous twits, who invariably say of Islam "I am no expert" (or "authority" or "scholar") and then say the (noble) Islam has been "hijacked" by extremists and then go on to set calamitous policy even though they have admitted they know nothing about Islam, are being exposed for what they are.

Yes twits. Presidents can be twits, Prime Ministers can be twits. Anyone can be a twit.

People are beginning to get it in the USA - in Europe as well, I think, but with the crazed  dhimmi legislation in Europe protecting "the religion of blood and war" (Winston Churchill - would he have been prosecuted?) and with the invasion by "Islamic Immigration" (Al-Hijra, in Arabic) in Europe much more advanced with an already enormous Muslim population, and growing, the situation is far more dire.

Andrew McCarthy (successfully) prosecuted the blind sheikh who organised the first World Trade Center attack in 1993.

He is first class. And he is a lawyer!


Andrew C. McCarthy writes in National Review:

A tectonic shift is in motion: How fitting that its focal point is Ground Zero, the inevitable fault line between Islam and the West.

Only the blink of an eye ago, uttering the unpleasant truth that in terms of doctrine there is no such thing as "moderate Islam" resulted in one's banishment from what our opinion elites like to call the "mainstream," by which they mean the narrow-minded, viciously defended circle of their own pieties and fictions. You could say it, but your skin had better have an extra coat or two of thick: You were in for a fusillade of rage, the likes of which our candor-phobic elites would never dream of unleashing at our Islamist enemies - no matter how clearly those enemies announced their intention to destroy us.

The fusillade still comes, but now its blows only glance. The elites and their mainstream have been exposed as frauds: Being on the wrong side of enough 70-30 issues will do that to you.

It should never have gotten this far. Sponsors of the Ground Zero mosque neither own the property in question nor possess the means to build and operate the palatial Islamic center they envision. The more light that shines on their record of murky real-estate dealings and the dubious circumstances of their limited stake in the Ground Zero property, the more questions arise. In a more sensible world, those questions would get answered before we plunged into a rancorous public debate. That hasn't happened, though. In spite of the implacable determination of the mayor (and the attorney general who would be governor) to look the other way, the issue has galvanized the public. What has long bubbled beneath the surface did not need much more heat to boil over.

For the better part of two decades, Americans have been murdered by Islamists and then lectured that they are to blame for what has befallen them. We have been instructed in the need for special sensitivity to the unceasing demands of Islamic culture and falsely accused of intolerance by the people who wrote the book on intolerance.Americans have sacrificed blood and bottomless treasure for Islamic peoples who despise Americans - and despise us even more as our sacrifices and gestures of self-loathing intensify. Americans have watched as apologists for terrorists and sharia were made the face of an American Muslim community that we were simultaneously assured was the very picture of pro-American moderation.

Americans have had our fill. We are willing to live many lies. This one, though, strikes too close to home, arousing our heretofore dormant sense of decency. Americans have now heard Barack Obama's shtick enough times to know that when he talks about "our values," he's really talking about his values, which most of us don't share. And after ten years of CAIR's tired tirades, we're immune to Feisal Rauf, too.

We look around us and we see our country unrivaled by anything in the history of human tolerance. We see thousands of thriving mosques, permitted to operate freely even though we know for a fact that mosques have been used against us, repeatedly, to urge terrorism, recruit terrorists, raise money for terrorists, store and transfer firearms, and inflame Muslims against America and the West. As Islamists rage against us, we see Islam celebrated in official Washington. As we reach out for the umpty-umpth time, we find Muslim leaders taking what we offer, but always with complaint and never with reciprocation. We're weary, and we don't really care if that means thatTime magazine, Michael Bloomberg, Katie Couric, Fareed Zakaria, and the rest think we're bad people - they think we're bad people, anyway.

So finally we're asking: Where is this "moderate Islam" you've been telling us about? Why would a self-proclaimed bridge-builder insist on something so patently provocative and divisive? How can we be sure that if imam Rauf builds his monument on our graveyard, it won't become what other purportedly "moderate" Islamic centers have become: a cauldron of anti-American vitriol?

It turns out that there are no satisfactory answers. When finally pressed on the taxonomy of moderate Islam, the best our elites can do - besides shouting "Islamophobia!" - is debate whether there ever wasa "golden age" of Islamic tolerance. They have to confess that the Islamists - whom they'd like us to see as a handful of "extremists" but who are in truth a mass movement - are in the ascendancy. It is embarrassingly obvious that while some of us have been working to defeat Islamism in our midst, our elites are of the incorrigibly progressive mindset that counsels accommodating them - in the delusion that they will be appeased rather than encouraged to become more aggressive. That is precisely the mindset that makes an Islamist think: Maybe now is the time for a $100 million mosque at Ground Zero.

"Moderate Islam" is a dream, not a reality. It is a dream with potential, because there are millions of Muslims who are moderate people, and because there are dedicated Muslims working to transform their faith into something that is institutionally moderate. But they work against great odds. They confront Islamists whose dedication to theocratic principles is deeply and undeniably rooted in Islamic scripture. And they confront American opinion elites who, wittingly or not, serve as the lifeline of the Islamists.


The reformers' slim chance at prevailing hinges on the American people's will to say "no" to our self-anointed betters. Ground Zero, once again the site of epic Islamist overreach, may be remembered as the place where we started to say "no."

Posted on 09/09/2010 5:41 AM by The Law
Comments
9 Sep 2010
Send an emailLugo

What's going to happen is that the owner of the GZM will say, "Oh, so sorry, I didn't know that was offensive - I guess I'll build my mosque a little further away from Ground Zero."

At that point he will have completely outwitted the opponents of the mosque and the opponents of the Islamization of the West. The twits will say, "See, there is such a thing as moderate Islam after all!", and opponents of the mosque will have no effective response, because they have hitched their opposition to where the mosque is built rather than the fact a mosque is built at all

We should oppose the construction of mosques anywhere in the USA, not merely a given "forbidden" distance from Ground Zero.   To do otherwise is to surrender slowly but surely to Islam.



Most Recent Posts at The Iconoclast
Search The Iconoclast
Enter text, Go to search:
The Iconoclast Posts by Author
The Iconoclast Archives
sun mon tue wed thu fri sat
    1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29    

RSS Site Feed
RSS Feed