9/11 attack on the Twin Towers
For some time it has been on my mind, this column about the US and Islam (as I write this Halbe Zijlstra, a Dutch politician, is jabbering in the background on my TV about refugees and integration). On Twitter I see a lot of tweets about Islam, ranging from critical to very negative, rarely positive. Personally, I also make a contribution to the Islam ‘debate’. About the role of the US in the world I see relatively less tweets (may have to do with the composition of my timeline). Islam is portrayed by many as a great danger and evil. To a large extent I agree with that. The US (along with the rest of the West) is seen by many as the fighter of evil. I think the latter is a big misunderstanding. I will explain why.
Reason to write this column now is threefold, a recent article by Hanina Ajarai in AD (a Dutch newspaper) with the title ‘Islam-index of the Netherlands‘, an article by GeenStijl (a Dutch newssite) titled ‘9/11 Comment du jour. Peter Emile‘ and my recent acquaintance with Bluehand.
To start with the latter (the easiest one), my Bluehand ‘membership’ brought me a large number of new US followers on Twitter. Most of them are proud of the US and supporter of Donald Trump (their Twitter names often begin with ‘Deplorable’, you know, that statement made by Hillary Clinton about Trump supporters). Their idea of their US could be quite contrary to the image that I have of the US. With this column I will show them (they are warned) how I and many others think about the US, also in relation to Islam.
Islam according to Hanina Ajarai
Hanina Ajarai opens her article with ‘The Netherlands is actually in need of more Islam, not less’. She refers to a speech (election propaganda) by Dutch politicain Edith Schippers who pays a tribute to the Dutch core values like freedom and equality. These core values, according to Edith Schippers, are rejected by Islam. Hanina claims to the contrary based on a survey by American (coincidence?) Scientists.
Among other things she wrote ‘The scientists came to almost the same values as Minister Schippers: justice, equality, equal opportunities for all, honesty, fair leadership (good governance) and sustainability‘. Basis for these values, you guessed it, the Koran. With this Hanina substantiates her claim at the beginning of her article.
There is a lot to find on the Internet about the norms and values in Islam. I found this article (in Dutch) ‘Islamic and Western values‘. What Hanina forgets to mention (conveniently or taqiya?) in her article is the following (quote paragraph 12 from the article ‘Islamic and Western values’):
‘Looking for an Islamic ethic we found on the Muslim website www.harunyahya.com ‘The True Islamic Morals’ and ‘Righteous Deeds’. Here we find concepts like ‘compassion, tolerance and peace’. That sounds good to Western ears and creates the expectation that it is possible to achieve ‘common ethical values and standards’. However, this can not be inferred from the Surah mentioned here, nor from the ‘blessed history of the centuries-long Ottoman empire’. Because we have to remember that these words apply only to Muslims and not to infidels (kafirs). Islam makes a clear distinction between the Muslims and all others who apply according to Sura 5:60 as (the descendants of) ‘monkeys’ (the Jews); ‘pigs’ (Christians) or ‘demons (the rest or ‘heathens’)‘.
So, the Islamic values apply only to Muslims. Looking at the Islamic world (also the dictatorships Hanina mentions in her article) and at some groups of Muslims in the Netherlands and Europe, I see a totally different picture. An image of Islam, very well articulated by Matthew Bracken. You can find his description of Islam in my column ‘Islam, International Socialism and Nationalism‘. Bracken begins his description of Islam:
‘Islam is similar to a self-replicating supercomputer virus. It is a hydra-headed monster, designed by its creators to be an unstoppable formula for global conquest‘.
Another quote from this article for those who have hope of reforming Islam.
‘A meaningful or permanent reformation of Islam is impossible, because a new generation of fanatics, wielding the unexpurgated Koran and Hadith as their weapons, will always declare the reformists to be apostates and murder them. In Islam, the fanatics who are holding the unalterable Koran in one hand and a sword in the other always stand ready to seize complete power and exterminate their enemies‘.
So, just forget about reforming Islam (which does not mean that individual Muslims could not adapt to our values, for instance, by walking away from Islam). Bracken ends his description of Islam as follows.
‘The immutable Koran is the constant fountainhead of bloody Islamic conquest. Radical Islam is the pure Islam, the Koranic Islam, the real Islam. Anyone who does not understand this bitter reality is dangerously ignorant of the past 1400 years of human history‘.
In the introduction I wrote ‘Islam is portrayed by many as a great danger and evil‘. To a large extent I agree with that. Large because Islam is indeed an evil ideology (once again clearly indicated by Geert Wilders during a Dutch parliamentary debate english subtitles). But I think Islam is not yet a very big (in the sense of uncontrollable) danger in the western world and it will not be if, and I stress IF, we intervene in time (see also the stages in the picture below ). Possibly you are thinking ‘but what about the recent attacks?‘. Those are nothing compared with what is going on in the Islamic world and what awaits us if we do not intervene (read it here).
The Netherlands and Europe are at this moment at the end of phase 2
So we will have to intervene in time. In addition, I see two major problems, no not Islam itself but first political correctness (as once again clearly demonstrated during that recent Dutch parliamentary debate) and second the US role in the world. More on that later, now first on the article by GeenStijl about 9/11.
9/11 comment du jour. By Peter Emile
In a comment on a 9/11 item by GeenStijl Peter Emile expresses his frustrations on Islam. He opens his commentary with the following sentences.
‘Since 9/11 – the Pearl Harbor of the 21st century – my vision of the world, especially of Islam, turned completely.
9/11 was a declaration of war from Islam to America, to the west, to you, to me – to everything that we stand for and to our way of life‘.
It seems to me that the article by Hanina Ajarai hit him (and many others) very hard bellow the belt.
Peter Emile rages, rightly so, on in his comment. About everything negative that since 9/11 happened thanks to Islam, in the Netherlands and in Europe (things also mentioned in phases 1 and 2 in the previous picture) and also about one of the major problems, political correctness. He writes:
‘Since the declaration of war by Islam to the West – so to us – Dutch housewives scattered ‘welcome to my country’ songs on the Internet and many Dutch citizens, columnists, politicians, opinion leaders and journalists directly or indirectly, stood up for this terrible ideology‘.
Peter Emile says: ‘Since 9/11, I’m angry. No, furious. Not only against that subversive, barbaric desert ideology from the pre-medieval times ……. ‘. Angry, furious with Islam. But is that entirely justified? I don’t think so. Don’t get me wrong, Islam is evil, we have seen that the past centuries and more recent. Given the inadequate capacities of the Islamic world it did not have to become so bad in the post WW2 global arena. Peter Emile said, ‘9/11 was a declaration of war by Islam to America‘. I think 9/11 was a declaration of war by America to Islam. That’s what the next chapter is about.
The role of the US in the world
After World War II, the US has managed to position itself increasingly as the ‘policeman’ of the world. Interference (military intervention and regime changes) in many countries around the world. Looking at the long list of countries, I wonder where I’ll start.
The Afghan war, which began with a Soviet invasion on 24 December 1979. This war between the Soviet-Union on one side and the Mujahideen (Islamic resistance) on the other hand ended on February 15, 1989 with the withdrawal of Soviet troops from Afghanistan, followed by the outbreak of the Afghan Civil War (source: Wikipedia). That withdrawal was mainly due to the support that the US gave a.o. by means of supplying arms to the mujahideen. In a column (Dutch) ‘War Afghanistan is endless‘ (source: website Curiales) this is described as follows.
‘The Soviet-Afghan war was a proxy conflict of the Cold War. It is well known that the United States supported the Mujahideen. Operation Cyclone was a major action of the CIA to supply the Mujahideen with weapons and money. Neighboring Pakistan was involved to. In Pakistan (international) jihadists were trained after which they were sent to Afghanistan to fight the Soviets. With this the US has contributed to the escalation of the conflict. The war was very bloody, 15,000 Soviets died. The Mujahideen lost between 75,000 and 90,000 men. However, the civilian population suffered the heaviest losses, estimates vary between 850.000- and a half million victims‘.
With that war the germ of the current Islamic terrorism was laid and escalated after the attacks of 9/11. The War on Terror had begun. In 2001, the US and its allies invaded Afghanistan.
Another very important event in recent history took place in the early nineties. The fall of the Soviet-Union. With that the cold war seemed to end. For the US, a reason to further strengthen their position in the world. A well known saying in 1992 by the American Paul Wolfowitz (the so-called Wolfowitz Doctrine) is:
‘It is our priority to avoid the rise of a new rival on the former territory of the Soviet Union or elsewhere‘.
Well, I’m not going to beat around the bush any longer. Previously I wrote about the role of the US in the world ‘Where would we be without The United States of America‘. In that column I did not write about 9/11 but I mentioned at the end a few links to documentaries about 9/11 under ‘9/11 False flag?’. 9/11 a False flag, I believe that more and more (False flag, a ‘trademark’ of the US). Hereafter the links.
Shocking? Well, looking at the Wolfowitz Doctrine and what is happening in the world, I can draw only one conclusion, the US do everything to preserve and strengthen their dominant position in the world. They even knocked down their own Twin Towers to legitimize The War On Terror. So it’s not really about a War on Terror. The US is using the so-called War on Terror just to maintain their dominance.
Really quite disappointing for the US is that Putin’s Russia and China
don’t give a shit don’t seem to care about the ambitions of the US. Even worse (or better), they undermine that position, economically, monetarily and militarily. I think this explains partly the wars in the Middle East, ‘legitimized’ by 9/11, with a worst case scenario (planned?) a Third world war.
But there is even more (previous articles I published here and here). The refugees from the Middle East and North Africa. About the flow of refugees I still dare to say it’s part of a bigger plan. A plan by the US to weaken the position of Europe and/or a plan in which the EU participates docile, the replacement of the European people (more about that here, here and here in Dutch). Having said that, I have to mention that broader coalition, the UN, US and EU, aiming for further globalization (I’m avoiding here that very well known acronym).
If Islam is (still) not the big danger, then who is?
As I mentioned earlier, Islam is an evil ideology. However, a bigger evil is the US as a war machine in the globalist coalition. Islam is abused by the coalition to achieve their goals. ‘Death to America’ which is often called during demonstrations in Iran sometimes used to upset me. Now I understand that more and more (if that’s not about the ordinary American citizens). Don’t get me wrong, Iran is, like Saudi Arabia, an evil country.
To prevent Islam becoming too great a threat for our Western societies we should actually first get rid of the elite who deliberately cause death and destruction in the Islamic world and strive for a conflict with the Russians and Chinese. In addition, we will have to keep Islam out of our countries and leave the Islamic countries alone as much as possible. Because, as Matthew Bracken puts it, Islam remains a lurking danger even without the elite. Algerian President Houari Boumedienne said in New York in a speech to the UN (1974):
‘One day, millions of men will leave the Southern Hemisphere to go to the Northern Hemisphere. And they will not go there as friends. Because they will go there to conquer it. And they will conquer it with their sons. The wombs of our women will give us victory‘.
The demographic time bomb seems to justify the replacement of European people if we assume that drastic population shrinkage is not acceptable. But to stop that shrinkage with the import of ‘refugees’ from Islamic countries is a terrible ‘solution’. The end of our free society.
What has to happen?
First we must get rid of political correctness and the incumbent elite. How? That seems not an easy task. Evil (Matthew Bracken calls it International Socialism) is deeply rooted, national, European and global. Where does the real change start?
Is that for the US Trump instead of Clinton? Hillary Clinton, I do not expect much good from her, rather a worsening of the current, already malignant power policy of the US, so Wolfowitz 3.0 (Obama was 2.0). And Trump, is he real or a distraction? And if he is real, is he’s going to take care of normalized relations with Russia and China? I wish the American people a lot of wisdom and strength.
For Europe, I know what to do. We must move away from the current undemocratic anti-European autocracy called EU.
And then we have my country, the Netherlands. We will have to vote away the incumbent government parties (VVD and PvdA) and their partners (D66, CDA, SP, GroenLinks, CU, SGP). The alternative is Geert Wilders freedom party PVV. I refer to this article by Jan Gajentaan and my contribution to the PVV stratigic sheet (both in Dutch). Priorities for me and many others are to stop Islam and a Nexit. No other party in Holland has these two primary goals in their program. So we have to start somewhere.
And what applies to the Netherlands, is also applicable to other European countries, where we also see more and more resistance.
The upcoming elections in the US, in the Netherlands and other European countries are essential to the survival of Western civilization, no I don’t mean the so-called civilization of the elite but a civilization which is ours, in which we, our children and grandchildren can live in freedom and in peace.
The upcoming elections are our last chance. Don’t you blow it.