Nice country ya got there…

In an open letter they say British policy is putting civilians at increased risk in the UK and abroad. […]

“It is our view that current British government policy risks putting civilians at increased risk both in the UK and abroad. […]

We urge the Prime Minister to redouble his efforts to tackle terror and extremism and change our foreign policy to show the world that we value the lives of civilians wherever they live and whatever their religion.

Such a move would make us all safer.” – from the BBC report on the letter sent by Muslim groups to Tony Blair

Imagine that you were part of group associated, rightly or wrongly, with world problems. That’s not hard to do: through the ages, up until this very day, Jews have been blamed for world crises, and their response has nearly always been to lie low, to avoid rocking the boat. Japanese-Americans did their best to keep a low profile after Pearl Harbor. Any human group would act the same at times of possible guilt by association.

Not Muslims. At a time when the words “terrorist attack” brings to mind pictures of Middle-Eastern men, suicide vests and mosque preachings before anything else, Muslims would be expected not only to keep a low profile, but also to work to refute the guilt by association by helping the police root out the terrorists among them, and by condemning terrorism, all terrorism, not just in English in front of the microphones, but in Arabic on the mosque stand.

Instead, we got from them the height of brazenness: veiled threats. They say, “We condemn terrorism, but” (“but” means that all the preceding part should be discarded) “if extremists among us do it, you know why it happened”. They’re not to blame, it’s those extremists (as if the violent verses of the Koran are free for any Muslim to chuck out, any more than the Ramadan fast is). And the extremists, they’re not to blame either: the West made them do it by supporting Israel’s offensive in Lebanon, or by drawing blasphemous cartoons of Mohammed, or by invading Iraq, or by supporting Israel, or by establishing colonial rule in the Islamic world, or by setting up a Crusader kingdom in the Levant, or by… anything will do.

Saying it for the umpteenth time: the Muslims are skilled in pandering to the postmodern, exoticist, anti-colonialist, anti-American Left’s thought-patterns. The Left laps up such letters enthusiastically, holding them as proof that the solution is appeasement. Let this, by the way, be a slight digression to mention a startling irony: the Left is supposedly the protector of all peoples’ right to self-determination and the first to condemn Western “patronization” of the other, yet they treat the Muslims in the most patronizing way imaginable, in that they deem them to be like little children, devoid of any responsibility for their actions, free of any culpability for their misdeeds. Ironic. No other explanation but G-d’s work of making the intellectuals, the know-it-alls, the sophisticates, the rationalists behave irrationally and stay stuck on stupid.

Back to the main matter: the urging of Britain to “change our foreign policy” is nothing but a diplomatic way of making a protection racket. It’s different only in form, but not in substance, from a mafioso’s “Nice house you got there. It’d be a shame if it burned down one day”.

Don Vito Corleone making someone an offer he can’t refuse.

The Torah describes Ishmael, father of the Arabs and the Biblical type for the Muslims, as “a wild ass of a man: his hand shall be against every man, and every man’s hand against him” (Genesis 16:12, JPS translation). Our sages explain the epithet “wild ass of a man” thus: like a wild ass, he makes his way in the world through violence, but at the same time, like a man, he appeals to human laws and conventions to further his way. Ishmael uses terrorism and diplomacy at the same time to further his goal. He employs terrorism to force diplomatic pushes toward concessions to him, and then, on the slightest pretext, resumes terrorism to start it all again.

“His hand shall be against every man”, G-d says, and our eyes can see his hand striking from America to Bali. Through the astute employment of terrorism and appeal to human law in tandem, the Muslims are reaching the goal of shariah law everywhere. In Europe, they appeal to the Western concepts of majority rule and freedom of speech to form independent jurisdictions (communautarisme, a French term denoting the situation of having a state within a state), until they become the majority and can then vote the Western democracies away in favor of shariah law.

What can be done to stop shariah law from dominating the world? G-d supplies the antidote: “And every man’s hand against him”. When every man, i.e. all non-Muslims, decide they’ve had enough and unite against Ishmael, then he will be stopped. We have it here from HaShem Himself that appeasement won’t work. Part of the West, especially the Christian Bible-believers, but also a few secularists who reason that it is better to support Jewish fanatics who want a sizable chunk of land in the Middle East than Islamic fanatics whose hunger only the whole world will sate, are already focused toward that goal. But a great part, the Left, Marxists, postmodern academics, 1960’s hippies who haven’t grown up, and most secularists (because of their rationalism, which makes them assume all humans are like them capable of being pacified by material offerings), grinds on with the call to appeasement. So far, ever since 9/11, each terrorist attack has only emboldened the Left’s desire to appease. Perhaps when the hippies realize that Islamic rule isn’t about free love or gay rights or mystic crystal revelation, they will join humanity in being a hand against Ishmael. The sooner the better, because the later it happens the more suffering there will be.

Wake up or smell the Shariah!