Review of Jewish interest in the world of Islam | Caroline Cox and John Marks: The West, Islam and Islamism: Is Ideological Islam Compatible with Liberal Democracy?
No serious value in understanding the three-way war, 15 Sep 2008
Ten years ago, I'd have laughed off Islam as a quaint absurdity. In fact it's a model of what a rigid belief system can do. So it should be understood. There are 1.6 billion reasons why. This book is at first sight OK BUT:--
[1] This book draws no conclusion; in a sense it's useless.
In Britain these people get more rights than the 'natives' and deliberately outbreed them. Women have few rights (the police and the system collude in not helping them; Muslim police are known to be relatively corrupt). The women have arranged 'marriages', polygamy, are often uneducated and in fear, and have little choice but breed.
So what should be done? There are roughly four possible approaches: [1] do nothing with the virtual certainty there'll be an ineducable underclass—or overclass; what might happen—probably a sub-scientific society—is not discussed in the book; [2] hope they can be reformed, and encourage reform; [3] withdraw their benefits etc; [4] explicitly do everything to remove them, by, for example, enforcing laws against ritual slaughter and mosques, preventing separatist education, and prosecuting all apostles of violence.
This book is dishonest in not clearly facing the options.
[2] Sceptics will be irritated by the book's assumptions about 'liberal democracies' compared with Islamic societies and Marxist societies. A table: 'Western societies.. pluralism is encouraged and realised. .. there are commitments to equality..' I'd rather live here than there, but the blithe assumptions are of course nonsense, as wars in Vietnam, Iraq and so on, and attacks on democracy in for example the EU, and censorship, prove.
[3] One clue to this book is that it understates completely the role of Jews in the west. In many ways Judaism is similar to Islam:
*ritual slaughter and food taboos
*circumcision and (arguably) distinctive odd clothing
*very pronounced racist (Judaism) and tribalist (Islam) feeling
*deliberate dishonesty (Kol Nidre in Judaism, Taqqiya in Islam) similar to 'Jesuitry'
*Legal system of a sort
*Sacred texts
Much of the material comes from American Jews e.g. Daniel Pipes. Naturally such people don't draw attention to these similarities. BUT Jews in the 'west' OUGHT to be studied as an analogous case, to predict what might happen.
[4] The differences between these religions are crucial:
*Sheer population numbers—Islam is not particularist, unlike Judaism, and can spread anywhere
*Slavery—very much emphasised in the Quran. Caroline Cox has appendices about the Sudan showing Islamically-encouraged slaughters and abductions. These of course are horrible and savage; but what about the 'west' and its actions? What about Catholics in South East Asia?
*Jihad—struggle. It sounds very like 'Mein Kampf'. In fact parts of this book—for example 'The Project'—resemble the 'protocols' and may even have been written to suggest such a parallel.
[5] The book assumes 9/11 was Islamic—sceptical readers will know of course this is nonsense. Both authors assume the 'Holocaust' was a fact, and generally regard Hitler as irrational etc, which doesn't improve the book. They also think al Queda exists in a way it is known not to. These mistakes ruin any chance that this book can reach useful conclusions.
[6] There is some solid information here, for example, 7 prominent individuals in 20th C Islam, and 12 prominent organisations. Whether these are accurate, one has to doubt. But the drawbacks of this book are so serious, as is its failure to take the subject seriously, I can give only one star.
In contrast, some 2012 truths by 'Paris Claims' about Britain:–
"According to numerical calculations based on government statistics from Wikileaks and media reports, the British government spend a minimum £18 billion a year from tax revenues on unproductive Muslim immigrants. While the government is trying to create £12 billion in annual cuts from benefit payments by targeting the handicapped, elderly and poor amongst its own citizens, they have neglected to reject from the country a group that is highly overrepresented above anyone else in welfare exploitation.
Daily Telegraph reported in 2012 that 75% of all Muslim women are unemployed, while 50% of all Muslim men are unemployed - risen from 13% for men and 18% for women in 2004. Muslims are also on sick leave more than anyone else, with 24% of females and 21% of males claiming a disability (2001 figures). Muslims are the most likely among all religious groups to be living in accommodation rented from the council or housing association (28%); 4% live rent-free (2004 figures). As if this is not enough, the total prison population in the UK amongst category A and B criminals (the worse crimes) is now 35-39% Muslim.
Although the statistics do not make it fully clear how many actually collect benefits, a rough estimate can be made. Money-wise it means that out of 5 million Muslims living in Britain (2012 demographics), 4.25 million Muslims, or 85%, live off tax payers. If we average this with the minimum benefit payment of £67 a week, at least 284,750,000 per week (£1.1 billion per month) is spent from taxpayer money to feed and care for Muslims who don't contribute anything whatsoever to Britain's revenues—except making more Muslims.
And that calculation doesn't even include housing benefits, childcare support, medical care and other coverage utilized by the population. We can estimate that with housing, child subsidies and healthcare, Muslims cost the British government at least £1.5 billion a month, or £18 billion a year. The Muslim population doubles every 7-years in Britain. By 2030, Britain will have a 40% Muslim population. And who will feed and house them? There is simply nowhere for the British economy to go but a collapse. 32 percent of Muslims on UK campuses believe killing in the name of religion is justified, 54 percent wanted a Muslim Party to represent their world view in Parliament, and 40 percent of young Muslims in the UK want the country to be governed under Sharia law (2004 report).
And some 2016 truths, in Germany, from Karlfried (Occidental Observer, October 27):–
In Germany the situation is as follows: That said group has a name (young refugees without parents, short form: MuFl). They are paid for by the German state. The costs are high. — Per one year and one person of this group the "caritative" organisations get 40,000 to 60,000 Euros paid from the German taxpayer. It is more than ten times the money that a German family has for its own child. This money is pressed out from the working parts of our folk. This puts the German churches (protestant as well as catholic) into the same group of money-grabbers and criminals as the big drug cartels of the world. In a time not too far away, this greed and German-folk-killing actions will break their neck. German families can now see easily to whom the money is given and to whom not.
Both these authors make an important mistake: the huge payments are not made from yearly taxation, since they would immediately be seen to be impossibly high. Instead, they are made by loans, increasing each nation's debt, to Jews controlling the banks. It's similar to Jews lending corrupt third world dictators vast amounts to waste, then expecting the people to pay them back.