Articles

Sunday, February 26, 2012

Islam Uber Alles

The first law of human affairs is force. Before all other laws, the ballot box and appeals to reason is that primal law that enforces submission through violence. Islam is a religion built on that first law, forcing everyone to choose whether they will be the oppressors or the oppressed, whether they will be a Muslim or a Dhimmi.

The organizing force of Islam can be seen in urban gangs which react in much the same way to being 'disrespected'. When your religion is little more than an entitlement to be a thug, to elevate your way of life over that of everyone else, violent outrage over even the most minute sign of disrespect is to be expected. And when your beliefs are little more than an excuse to hate, rioting over a slight is the  sacrament of your faith.

Islam did not expand through the persuasiveness of its illiterate child abusing founder, at least not beyond the initial persuasion that allowed him to gather bandit troops to raid, murder and enslave the multicultural peoples of the desert until there was nothing left but Muslims and their slaves. It expanded by force and it has gone on expanding by force. Faced with advanced civilizations, it has reacted with the violent petulant fury that is its spiritual heritage.

The first law is the only true law of Islam. That is the law being practiced by the Afghan rioters and murderers outraged over the burnings of already defaced Korans, as their counterparts have gone on similar rampages over cartoons of Mohammed, the Satanic Verses, Facebook postings and anything else which triggered their rage. This violence has the same goal of all Islamic terror, to maintain the privileged status of Muslims and enforce the submission of non-Muslims.

There is nothing that serves the first law so well as opponents who compromise or offer gestures of appeasement. Despite their numerical advantages, the society of the sword is too backward and lacking in organizational and technological skills to win a direct confrontation. It is only capable of treachery, of exploiting the humanitarian weaknesses of its enemies, of dressing up as dead men and chanting about their utter disregard for human life, of hiding among civilians, attacking in the dark and running to celebrate even the slightest victory as proof of Allah's endorsement of their cause. And none of this would do them the least bit of good if they faced civilizations willing to slap them down.

The cowardice of our leaders has elevated the Koran and its demented author above freedom of speech, above the rights of Americans and the lives of American soldiers. When Muslims kill, the wounded society hurriedly searches for scapegoats that might have provoked them to the act. Was there an offensive cartoon, was a Koran flushed or singed, did they experience discrimination, are they upset about American foreign policy?

We have become a nation of psychiatrists rushing from international ward to ward trying to calm the lunatics before they go on a killing spree and then again after they have already gone on a killing spree. As a civilization we live in constant fear of a religion that our leaders constantly assure us is wholly peaceful. But if that were truly so, why do we have so much security in airports, why do we grovel so much before Muslim clerics and why do we have so many troops in Muslim countries?

The trouble is not that Islam has been violent, it has always been violent. It has a consistent record of violence that goes back over a thousand years. If history is any guide it will go on being violent a thousand years from now, if the world continues to be plagued by its savage barbarism for that long. Complaining that Islam is violent, that it it abusive, totalitarian and rejects co-existence on equal terms is as much good as complaining that the rain is wet.

Yes all these things are terrible and the people doing them really should know better, but their approach has more history behind it than ours does. Expecting them to change is being unrealistically optimistic about human nature. There is a reason why the First Law came first, because it is easy. Savagery is always simpler than civilization and it operates more frequently in our society than we would like to dwell on.

It is frightfully easy to intimidate someone else into doing what you want. Even the weak are capable of doing it. So much so the strong. Even the society we have built, for all its moral underpinnings, is quick to punish disobedience with a resort to the first law. But it has become equally quick to retreat in the face of the First Law and that is the trouble.

If a nation is good for nothing else, it is good for repelling invaders, burning their longboats and nailing their heads to a pike as a lesson to any who would follow in their path. Unfortunately we are not a nation, nor are we quite an empire, instead we are some sort of postmodern construct that is part human rights empire and part mercantile league of nations, but most of all an inspiration for the global civilization that is sure to follow as soon as we have enough international laws to make for a world government.

First World nations no longer properly represent national interests, they represent the Future of Man, in all capital letters. Invaders aren't sent packing with the business end of a spear, they are welcomed in to be integrated into a wonderfully diverse Republic of Man. Overseas invaders are pacified with tribute aid and democracy programs so that they will mature enough to join our world government and cooperate with us on such issues as global warming, birth control access and sustainable development.

We have the World Government. They have the Caliphate, which many of our leaders have decided is just a regional name for world government. And if we have to make a few compromises to get them on board, so be it. The Dar Al Islam has played this game before. Most of Mohammed's victims did not make a brave last stand, for the most part they were divided and conquered with illusory agreements and coalitions that proved absolutely worthless.

The Muslim world is frightfully clear about its agenda. Islam Uber Alles. They can be subtle about it, but quite often they take the direct route through the First Law.

The point that the rioters in Afghanistan are making is that the Koran is worth more than any bible and any human life. Once again we have proven their point for them. Just as the media proved their point when they censored the Mohammed cartoons without a single act of violence against CBS, CNN or any of their corporate behemoth cousins. Just as we proved their point when in response to the mass murder of Americans, we sent thousands of our young men and women to rebuild their countries and welcome them into the brotherhood of man.

The First Law is working quite well, both directly and indirectly. Direct violence terrorizes the authorities into cracking down on us. On our freedoms, our independence and our worldview. And indirectly it drives them to meet with "moderate" Muslims who offer to mediate and lay out their demands, which happen to be an incremental version of the same thing. Islam Uber Alles.

The direct approach bleeds us, the indirect approach dismantles our defenses. The direct approach flies planes into skyscrapers. The indirect approach fills voting districts with Muslims and then demands that we dismantle our defenses which make them feel persecuted. The two approaches work hand in glove, the "moderates" blinding us and tying our hands, while the "extremists" chop off our heads.

The only way to neutralize the First Law is with the First Law. It's an ugly business but it eventually gets the point across. Yes it will make us hated, but there is no option to be loved. We have a choice between being hated like the Christian Copts of Egypt or any other degraded and persecuted minority in the Muslim world, or we have the choice of being hated like Israel or the Franks. That means a choice between being hated as a despised underclass, as pigs and dogs, by people who have the ability to harm us on a regular basis, or being hated as the cruel persecutors who kept the faithful from extending the Dar Al Islam by people who have to try very hard to be able to hurt us.

Choices such as these are alien to our own elites who are thinking in terms of a borderless world, who want cooperation rather than conflict, and they are hard at work cooperating us into our graves. They keep trying to untie the Gordan Knot, instead of just cutting it and letting the pieces fall where they may.

The flag of Islam Uber Alles is flying over our cities, our governments and our foreign policy. Every time we submit, retreat and eagerly show the invaders how well we can cooperate with their demands, another flag flies in place of our own.

Islam only seeks one thing. Supremacy. Contained within that word is the sum of its religious ambitions, its collective will to power and its dream of a better world. When infidels bow, their faith in their own creed is strengthened. When the infidels resist, that refusal to submit drives them into a fierce hysteria that is equal parts insecurity and equal parts repression manifesting as violence.

As a religion, Islam is the faith of those impoverished in spirit, deprived of any aspiration but power over others. It is a slave's copy of Judaism, Christianity and the existing religions of the region, turned into a religion of slaves whose goal is the enslavement of mankind. Jihad is the only vital element of Islam because it is the only thing that gives it meaning. It is the means of its reproduction and the incarnation of its mission.

Islam Uber Alles is their code and as we meet force with apologies and terror with nation building, it becomes our code as well.

20 comments:

Matetyahu said...

excellent!

Joe Bloggs said...

You might find this discussion on islamic gangsterism interesting.

http://4freedoms.ning.com/group/uk/forum/topics/how-does-gangsterism-work

Edgar Davidson said...

And right on cue for this article look at the dhimmitude of the UK where a popular author has been detained for 'racism' at an airport for querying why a fully veiled Muslim woman is allowed to pass through security unchecked while he has to remove his scarf.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/9105788/Fireman-Sam-creator-detained-at-airport-for-veil-comment-at-security-gate.html

DP111 said...

Islam Uber Alles is their code.

Yes, and it is by that code that they will destroyed.

I just get the feeling that Islam is walking into a trap.

Anonymous said...

Your work is absolutely invaluable, Daniel because it completely and accurately describes what we are facing in clear and concise language.
I simply cannot believe the conciliatory and weasel language that is coming from the US administration at the moment. It's not the Koran burning the Afghans are rioting over - its the fact that they are emboldened by ISAF's groveling apology. In a war against anti-rational forces, any outward displays that may be perceived as weakness cost lives...

Edward Cline said...

Perhaps you've already read this in the Telegraph, which was reported on Jihad Watch. Gatwick "security" guards wanted this fellow to admit he made an "offensive" remark and apologize for it. It's interesting that there was a Muslim "security" guard who demanded an apology for a remark the fellow didn't make to her (her???) but which was related to her by another guard. So, the question also is, aside from the fact that this "security" let a veiled Muslim through without a check: Why wasn't she "offended" by the person who related the remark to her? If words can "hurt," why wasn't she hurt by the words of her colleague? Aren't words intrinsically "hurtful," no matter who utters them? These are rhetorical questions, of course. There's no reasoning with Islam or with political correctness. There seems to have also been an element of racism in the security guards' treatment of the fellow, as well. And it is precisely this kind of submission that Hillary Clinton wishes to impose on Americans via the OIC and the UN. I must give this Fireman Sam fellow credit for standing up to these distaff thugs. And this is another reason I refuse to even enter airports here in the U.S. I might look at a TSA goon or a Muslim the wrong way and be tackled by “security” without having said a word.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/9105788/Fireman-Sam-creator-detained-at-airport-for-veil-comment-at-security-gate.html

This news story underscores Daniel’s column. Islam is a disease that enfeebles. It is meant to enfeeble not only Muslim believers, who refuse to think or listen to reason and “believe” that their creed allows them to dispense with reason; it also enfeebles its non-Muslim victims, and punishes anyone who does not “submit” to Muslim irrationality.

Rita said...

Sultan Knisch you ARE the David and give me hope that your courage will - perhaps - kill this nasty nasty nasty Goliath. But this can only happen if there are other people of courage speaking out.

However, those of us less courageous should, from behind the security of our screens,at the very least, distribute Daniel's words wide and far. Because to say nothing is to say YES!.

fsy said...


... whether they will be a Muslim or a Dhimmi.


Of course, those are not the only choices. Anyone else is offered death.

fsy said...


I must give this Fireman Sam fellow credit for standing up to these distaff thugs.


He didn't really stand up to them completely, since his account is full of repetitions of phrases like, "I said nothing racist", "I said nothing offensive". Evidently this 67-year-old man (born at the end of WWII) has completely assimilated the idea that 'offensive' words deserve to be criminalized.

Edward Cline said...

FSY: Re Fireman Sam -- at least he challenged the goons. That's a first step to de-programming oneself. Whether or not he takes further steps remains to be seen. But the fact that he was set up by the goons is indisputable. It could happen to anyone, dhimmi or non-dhimmi.

Anonymous said...

I would tell you to be careful David-but I am sure you have weighed your statements and their impact.

America is lost-and I have decided to make plans for the type of society that is without civility or rule of law. It is only a matter of time.

When I look at the Islamic practitioners, I see a struggle between two species of being fighting for the same environment. One of them is willing to do whatever is necessary to continue it's propagation-while the other is killed off methodically while putting up no fight. Natural selection is accepted by naturalists, yet they refuse to see that very fact in the human world.

I will not succumb-and my tribe will not succumb to Sharia law.
Beans, bandaids and bullets.

Francine said...

I dontsee why you make fun of islams and the religeon of them by far they teach mostly good things and a few of them are being nasty and going from the deep end but really not all of it doing that why pick on the few of them and make fun of the hole things.

Edward Cline said...

Francine: Obviously, English is not your first language, so I’m surprised you even read the article from beginning to end. Or possibly you did not. Daniel will probably agree with me when I say that, first, he isn’t making fun of Islam, but is dead serious about its venomous and mind-stunting nature; and second, that it isn’t a matter of a few Muslims being “nasty,” but those “nasty few” being consistent practitioners of Islam, whereas most Muslims, with very, very few exceptions, are a silent majority who b y their silence sanction the violent but consistent ones. Also, Islam doesn’t “teach mostly good things.” Islam isn’t about teaching anything but submission to it and its supremacy over all things human, by stealth or by violence. That is its nature and its agenda. If Muslims engage in “good works,” such as charity or feeding the poor or running clinics, the beneficiaries are Muslims only, not non-believers. And most Islamic “charities” are fronts for violent jihadists, with much of the donated or extorted money going to fund terrorism. Re the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, and the Holy Land Foundation.

Gray Falcon said...

The impression I get of the Western elites is that they want to make an ally of Islam, use it as a weapon or tool against places like Russia, China, India and even Europe - and that the current faux "war on terror" is all about what they think are "renegade" Muslims (i.e those who refuse this grand alliance).

Hence the vocabulary of "extremists" vs. "moderates," the "Religion of Peace" stuff, and support for militant Islam in places like the Caucasus and the Balkans. Thoughts?

fsy said...


FSY: Re Fireman Sam -- at least he challenged the goons.


I'm not out to judge him, only to express my surprise that someone of that age could have so thoroughly absorbed ideas which didn't exist when he was young in the 50's and early 60's.

hillclimber said...

It is curious that we can see the single minded evil that is Islam, but those we chose to govern us, cannot. Yes it is ugly business, but it must be taken up.

NeeNee said...

As I recall, it was during Jimmah Carter's administration that we saw Islam first push us into a corner.

We have simply got to get over this notion that the whole world should be like the USA. Evil is evil, and you can't dress it up in a costume of democracy, expecting it to convert. Islam uses deception & lies when "cooperating" with the West. While we're busy lapping it up, they are building weapons & nukes capable of destroying us on our own soil.

Ironic how a culture basically stuck back in the Middle Ages now uses Western technology to assault and kill us. They decry such things as music of any kind, but embrace AK-47's/poison gas/bombs.

23 Skidoo said...

Being offensive is not a crime and being offended is not a reason to seek sympathy.

southgeek.blotspot.com

Anonymous said...

You have so much insight. I always enjoy reading your articles.

Anonymous said...

Mohammed had sex with pigs, which is why all his descendants are pigs and whores. Muslims have not evolved and contains primitive animals

Post a Comment