Pincer Movement (updated 15aug2010)

George Rebane

The news outlets today are buzzing with the latest report from the Pew Hispanic Center that one out of twelve births in America are to fugitive illegal entrants.  According to the now established interpretation of the 14th Amendment, these babies automatically become bona fide American citizens upon post-partum.  Achieving 21 years of age they can start sponsoring family members from south of the border.

Meanwhile, the decadal census, which is supposed to determine representation in Congress, does not ask the immigration status of its respondents.  Therefore outfits like Pew and various government agencies must jump through statistical hoops to arrive at the currently accepted 12 million figure for illegals in the country.

Hispanic birthrates are the highest in the land.  The US Census Bureau estimates that in 2050 almost one quarter of the US population will be Hispanic.  Organizations like La Raza and MALDEF are celebrating such news as a continuing vindication of Reconquista progress.  Hispanic leaders in America (some in Congress) have for years made open public statements to cheering crowds that Aztlan - the American southwest of 1848 - will be theirs again through a bloodless conquest.  And if not that, then a bloody one will do.  Given the porous borders, anti-assimilation pressures, and today’s happy news of births to illegals, these prognostications are right on schedule.  (More here and RR search 'reconquista')

Then looking at the other coast, we are reminded that an even a greater invasion is being prepared from the east.  The American Muslim community has regained the temerity to plow ahead with the giant Cordoba House mosque within a few hundred feet of where Islam unequivocally declared its intention toward our civilization.  They know what they are doing, but we don’t.  We are instead practicing tolerance toward our invaders in the same spirit that we have always practiced tolerance toward welcomed minorities who come here to become part of the greater us.

Even their chosen name for the mosque is a triumphant telling to Islamic peoples all over the world.  By the end of the eighth century, the Caliphate of Cordoba covered most of the Iberian peninsula of what today is Spain and Portugal.  The city of Cordoba itself was the jewel of Islam’s progress to conquer Europe.  Cordoba’s population achieved 500,000 while Paris had yet to reach 40,000.  To Muslim’s everywhere ‘Cordoba’ is a battle cry of the Global Caliphate renewed, and that mosque will tell all that the final thrust into the heart of ‘The Great Satan’ is beginning.

By 1492 in Spain and 1683 in Vienna, Christian princes were able stop and reverse the Islamic conquest of Europe.  The interval proved extremely productive to European influence across the world.  And with the concurrent religion-induced stagnation of Islamic cultures, it became clear that Islam’s great commission of the Global Caliphate could not be achieved through force of arms.  The dream went on hold until after WW2 when it was awakened by the Cold War - an ideological rift that to the Muslims appeared as an internecine conflict at the heart of western civilization.

The west’s hunger for oil abetted the decision by the more fundamental Islamic factions that it was time to start moving again.  The founding of Israel was an unexpected boon in that it created a perennial and accessible friction that Islam could manage at will to create an environment to reawaken and mobilize Islamic emotions.  The Great Satan was erected and the people were again reminded of Quran’s teaching that the world consisted of two parts – dar al-Islam (the world of Islam) and dar al-Harb (the world of chaos and war).  We, dear reader, live in dar al-Harb where now Islam’s new conquest strategy of bomb and breed is in full force.

Islam correctly assessed that the progressive factions in the west would so weaken our civilization that the spiritual zeal required to maintain it would ultimately be removed and replaced by platitudes of insouciant tolerance, an irrecoverable asymmetry that would play into the hands of dar al-Islam.  Such an open civilization could be thrown off balance with a few bombs here and there, delivered by means that it could not stop without changing its transformed character and, more importantly, concluding that we are indeed in a war between civilizations.   And the west’s progressives could be relied upon to prohibit that realization to ever inform and influence public policy in western countries.

The intellectuals of Islam also realize that the window of opportunity for prosecuting dar al-Harb is limited.  They know better than we ourselves that progressivism is but a milestone on the path to autocracies that will most likely end in a large, coagulated, totalitarian order that is godless, militaristic, and united against dar al-Islam as its remaining enemy, touting a religion against which atheistic ideology is at a disadvantage.  Therefore the breeding and bombing must be stepped up while the oil advantage exists, and the west remains a relatively open and ignorant society.

The momentum belongs to Islam.  Given its vast Muslim settlements, Europe has already conceded that it will become part of dar al-Islam before this century is out.  The remainder of dar al-Harb is still underpinned by America, and will fall into a divide-and-conquer disarray as soon as the global hegemony of the Great Satan is compromised.  The next step in that process is to rekindle the glories of Cordoba, and build an indelible and inspiring monument at the site of Islam’s most significant victory, right in the heart of Manhattan.

[15aug2010 update]  The Clintonesque Obama.  After a good dose of heat on his Friday Ramadan dinner endorsement of the 'ground zero mosque', we now get the respun version via truthout.com.  If nothing else, the man is slick.

Obama Redefines His Previous Support for Mosque at Ground Zero
Margaret Talev, McClatchy Newspapers: "President Barack Obama sought Saturday to draw a distinction between supporting a Muslim group's right to build a mosque two blocks from Ground Zero in New York - a right he championed in a speech the night before - and thinking the project is a good idea. 'I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making the decision to put a mosque there,' he told reporters in Panama City, Florida."

Comments

[Todd Juvinall]

If they want to get in line and do it legally we are all for it. Alas, the liberals who favor abortion on demand must be reading this and going bonkers. The illegals with their anchor babies must put liberals in a tailspin.

[Dixon Cruickshank]

Absolutely great piece George, couldn't have said it better myself.

[Larry Wirth]

Au contraire, Todd. Liberals see anchor babies as their passport to future power. George, great article; I would have been a bit more strident. L

[Paul Emery]

"We are instead practicing tolerance toward our invaders in the same spirit that we have always practiced tolerance toward welcomed minorities who come here to become part of the greater us."

Are you implying that Americans and legal immigrants that practice Islam as the faith of their choice are invaders? Some pretty dramatic generalizations here George. Islam is a complex and diverse faith as is Christianity and I don't think your simplistic dramatization would hold up well in a discussion with a scholar of the Islam faith.

[George Rebane]

Paul, you're nailing it on the head. Yes they are "pretty dramatic generalizations" because I am reporting to you their arguments, the arguments that international Islam is reporting to its adherents. And these are not the ones that you get from CNN, MSNBC, etc. It is they who are looking at it exactly as I have relayed it to you. Bring on your scholar of the Islam faith and we will have the discussion you desire.

Look up 'dhimmitude' and see how it is used in the new Obamacare law. Please understand that these people are first and last settlers, not people who want to assimilate into the American amalgam. Open your horizons and hear what the EU leaders are saying, hear what the EU rank and file are saying about their Muslim settlements. Hear the bullshit that your President just respun from his Friday Ramadan speech to his recasting of it today. Bring your critical journalistic instincts to bear on this.

But once more, bring on your Islamic scholar.

[Paul Emery]

It's probably a good idea to find someone who engage in this conversation that can represent the diversity of Islam. I know, for example, that those who are Sufi's, a branch of Islam are completely different than those who follow Shi'a or Sunni traditions. Much like the difference between Protestants and Catholics. Zionists are much more militant than other Jewish factions. There are some Christians that worship snakes, as an extreme example. I'll look around for someone that can talk to this issue perhaps in a public meeting.

[George Rebane]

That sounds good Paul. But let's be sure that we don't stray off the subject in this pursuit. I am not aware of anyone contending that Islam does not have a rich structure of factions, sects, nuances within each, etc. And that there exist such correspondences between the various religions is worth little recount.

The issue worth a discussion is 'Islam is in a self-declared war with western civilization which it must win or suffer the fate of Christianity and Judaism at the hands of the secular humanists. The revival of this war is currently promoted and prosecuted by fundamental factions of Islam (it was ever thus), and funded by broader, like-minded segments of the worldwide community. Polls over the last years have indicated that the worldwide 'Muslim street' is more than sympathetic to a fall of western civilization and its replacement by one or more regional Islamic caliphates. Given the current asymmetries in the two cultures, what can/should the putatively moderate Muslims do to dispel the existence of dar al-Harb?'

I have worked intimately with Muslim colleagues over the years and count several of them as my friends. Our explicit and deep discussions on this issue would amaze anyone whose acquaintance with Islam's teachings are from the casual and mostly erroneous fare put out by the usual media.

As was 9/11 a shock to the west, equal shocks even more variated are on the way. Given what is happening in the world today, pabulous discussions revisiting the encyclopedic shades of Islam will not serve.

[Paul Emery]

That's a different conversation than one based on the definition of Islamic people as invaders unwilling to assimilate. There is no doubt that some factions of Islam promote Jihad against us but the vast majority of immigrants and those converted to Islam do not. I don't get the relation between 'dhimmitude' and the new Obamacare law. Can you explain?

[George Rebane]

?? "... definition of Islamic people as invaders unwilling to assimilate."?? Don't know where you got that one from. But one of Islam's stated (Quranic) core objectives, if not THE core objective is to achieve dar al-Islam by assiduously prosecuting dar al-Harb. That is the topic worthy of discussion with a knowledgeable and practicing Islamic.

"Dhimmitude is the Muslim system of controlling non-muslim populations conquered through jihad. Specifically, it is the TAXING of non-muslims in exchange for tolerating their presence AND as a coercive means of converting conquered remnants to islam." It is claimed that Obamacare introduces a first vestige of this by exempting a number of religious adherents - Muslims, Amish, New-Age sects, American Indian, ... - from having to buy health insurance. This is a discrimination against Christians and Jews among others. Probably the next dust-up on Obamacare.

[Paul Emery]

This was your quote George
"We are instead practicing tolerance toward our invaders in the same spirit that we have always practiced tolerance toward welcomed minorities who come here to become part of the greater us."

Calling immigrants invaders does imply that they don't intend to assimilate but instead wish to conquer.

Some recent history

In 1952 the democratically elected government of Iran was overthrown by Iranian rebels and the CIA in a coup codenamed Operation Ajax. The coup was planned by the CIA after receiving the blessings of the US and British governments. Muhammad Mosaddeq is deposed and later executed and the CIA promptly reinstates Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi , the Shah of Iran, to the throne. Now that was a wonderful human being.. Could events like this and our support of Sadam Hussein have contributed to our reputation as the Great Satan?

[George Rebane]

The implication on Islamic assimilation is correct. The paradigm is much like the invasion of the North American continent by the whites. We came as settlers to live peacefully among the Indians while we were numerically weak and as they remained compliant to our presence; and when our numbers increased, to drive them out and/or annihilate them if Plan A did not work. We did plan to screw the Indians, and the Indians were ignorant enough to let us. But never in our dreams did we ever plan to assimilate with them.

Now it looks like it's our turn to be the double dummies.

Re Great Satan - indeed that history with Iran gives them much basis for seeing us as the Great Satan, although their younger generation has a much nuanced view of both Europe and America. However, Iran's historical justification for such attributions is again another (orthogonal) issue to what is the intent of Islam given its teachings and today's geo-strategic stance.

Again, it's real easy to go all over the map and not make any progress on the 'war between civilizations' subject regardless of the multiple histories which led to the current state of world affairs.

[Paul Emery]

I'm glad you appreciate the hangover that results from the arrogance of imperialism that can affect future relationships for years. Imagine if Iran instigated a coup that would have resulted in the ouster and execution of Dwight Eisenhower and the installation of a dictator whose death squads would have killed thousands of citizens that were part of his administration. That's the time frame that we are looking at. It sure is a boost for radical action that we can take credit for inciting. Also, the British intentionally divided the Hindu and Moslem populations in India in the 19th and 20th Century to keep them from effectively resisting British colonialism. There's not much historical dispute about this.

There's an old saying that there's nothing better for religion than a healthy devil. We've certainly done our part.

And then there's the war in Iraq which has done more to strengthen radical Islam and the rise of Iran than we can imagine.

We need to look at ourselves and our history as we look to the future.

Ron Paul has a good take on this in his essay Why We Fight.