Most commenters on Jihad Watch are certainly anti-Islam, but their protestations and griping and whining and moaning -- whether pedestrian or more intellectualized -- never quite seem to attain the acutely crystalline point this one particular commenter ("Armed Infidel") wrote a few days ago:
What the hell is going on??? At what point are the UK and the USA going to wake up and admit that it is long past time to outlaw Islam and deport ALL of the Muslims from their respective countries???? Deport them to wherever they came from - if they will not go peacefully, use force if necessary, even if you have to drag them kicking and screaming, do it! Get them the hell out and back to their own kind. Make them pay for their own deportation costs, make they pay back to the state all past welfare payments they have received. If they are unable to pay, confiscate anything of value that they have to help defer their deportation costs. Stop the immigration of Muslims into the UK and USA. Stop the welfare payments to Muslims, don't give them a damn thing except a kick in the ass as they are being deported. Do not let them into the UK or USA for any reason at all...no tourist visas, no work visas, nothing!!! Confiscate their mosques under the law of eminent domain (since they are military command and control centers that answer only to Saudi Arabia) and then bulldoze the structures and then sell the land with the profits going to support the cost of deportation. Muslims are nothing but trouble...trouble that we do not need in the UK and USA anymore.
This is what we should be saying, all of us, over and over again, until it begins to penetrate the thick skull of our PC MC-numbed West. Or shall we wait another decade, after another few thousand, or hundred thousand, or millions, of non-Muslims around the world (and in the West) get maimed and mass-murdered by Muslims, before we stop being so damned careful about our language?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
There are too many problems with mass deportation. For example:
1. What are you going to do with the Muslims who were born here? And that includes converts and children of converts.
2. How are you going to define who a "Muslim" is for your purposes? Would that include someone like Barack Obama, who received a Muslim education in his youth? Would it include nominal Muslims, who were born to Muslim parents but don't believe or practice Islam?
3. Regardless of how you deal with the above, the act of taking away the citizenship of a whole group of one's compatriots would mean the end of democracy and the rule of law, as we in the West understand it. If the majority can go so far as to deprive a minority of citizen status, then the majority can pretty much do anything it wants, and that's just mob rule.
If there are to be deportations at all, they would have to be done on an individual basis and only after a fair and uniform legal procedure.
The situation right now is that the governments of the West, far from taking the most rudimentary measures to protect their citizens, are actually abetting Islamic encroachment. Yet going to the opposite extreme and advocating mass expulsion is at least as bad.
lava snit,
Good questions. I'll endeavor to answer them soon.
Concerning the question of the deportation of those who are deemed citizens, Hugh Fitzgerald cited a precedent, when in 1946, Czechoslovakia, then one of the most liberal and enlightened democracies of the West, reasonably enacted the deportation of over 3 million Germans, many of whom were not only Czech citizens, but who had family lineages in Czechoslovakia going back centuries.
Hugh's opening comment was this:
Benes and Masaryk [of Czechoslovakia] were among the most intelligent and tolerant spirits in all of Europe. Look what they felt justified, even compelled to do, with the Sudeten Germans in 1946. And no Czech then, or now, thinks they have the slightest reason to feel guilty -- and very few others, outside the circles of German revanchism. Were some of those Sudeten Germans (but only some) innocent? Yes. And so were some of those killed in Allied bombing raids over Tokyo or Berlin or Hiroshima or Nagasaki or Dresden. That is what happens, and has to happen, in modern warfare. And when one is trying to limit the menace to oneself, after identifying a pouplation that must, if it is by its own admission true to certain teachs, remain a permanent threat, has a right to remove that threat from its midst. That is the most elementary kind of personal, and civilizational, self-defense.
I [under the moniker "Dr. Pepper"] then got Hugh engaged in a debate with critics of his view, which you can find as you scroll down from the above-quoted comment in this linked Jihad Watch comments field --
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2005/10/french-dhimmitude-public-money-for-mosques.html#comment-85454
-- and keep your eye out for "Hugh" and "Dr. Pepper". Once you read Hugh's counter-arguments to his detractors, you get a fuller cogency to his original argument.
The bottom line is that Islam = deadly sedition, and therefore anyone who deems themselves members of Islam should be expelled -- not under the pretext that they are all factually proven to be deadly seditionists, but under the argument that a) we cannot tell the difference between those who are and those who aren't (many Islamic terrorists have turned out to be citizens of their Western countries); b) the consequences of our failure to weed out those who are (due to a less than total deportation) are sufficiently horrific and destructive to lives and infrastructure to warrant total deportation; and c) democracies have the right to take measures to protect their citizens and infrastructure whenever a deadly danger is discerned.
Czechoslovakia's democracy after 1946 did not fail because it deported German-Czechs, but because the Soviet Union conquered it.
Post a Comment