The Solution To Islamic Terrorism

Doug Bandler's picture
Submitted by Doug Bandler on Sat, 2013-04-27 03:44

This is Larry Auster's epic post on this subject. Its the post that started me down the path to the "quarantine" strategy for dealing with Islam; i.e. quarantine Islam within its ancestral lands. Forget ARI's ridiculous war policy from Rear-Admiral Brook. Auster explains brilliantly:

“We will have terrorist attacks and threats of terrorist attacks and inconvenient and humiliating security measures and the disruption of ordinary activities FOREVER, as long as Muslims are in the West in any significant numbers. The Muslim terrorists are part and parcel of the Muslim community. According to a survey reported in the Scotsman,
24 percent of Muslims in Britain (I never describe them as ‘British Muslims’) believe the July 2005 London bombings were justified. Imagine that. Not only do these Muslims in Britain support terrorism against Britain, they’re not afraid to say so openly to a pollster! The unchangeable fact is that wherever there is a sizable Muslim community there will be a very large number of terror supporters and therefore—inevitably—actual terrorists as well.

“This is our future, FOREVER, unless we stop Muslim immigration and initiate a steady out-migration of Muslims from the West until their remaining numbers are a small fraction of what they are now and there are no true believers among the ones that remain. Travelers from Muslim countries must be tightly restricted as well. Muslims must be essentially locked up inside Muslim lands, with only carefully screened individuals allowed into the non-Muslim world.

“The enemy are among us, in America, in Britain, in the West, and will remain so until we remove them from the West and indeed from the entire non-Muslim world. As extreme as this sounds, it is a no-brainer. There is no other solution. All other responses to this problem add up to meaningless hand-wringing. The hand-wringing will go on FOREVER, along with the terrorist attacks and the threat of terrorist attacks, until we take the ONLY STEPS that can actually and permanently end the threat.”

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/ar...

Now that he is dead, I miss Larry Auster. And I appreciate him more than I ever did when he was alive. Isn't that how it always is? No one wrote with such clarity on the subjects of Islam and the Left. Not one major Objectivist I've read has the guts to even state that the problem is with the presence of Muslims in Western lands (Ed Cline is coming real close though).

Auster's gradual out-migration of Muslims could never be done in today's Leftist world. But I think it should be advocated as a pro-liberty solution. I would love to see Objectivists just consider it instead of mocking it. But then again it seems like Objectivists won't be satisfied until there is a Boston Massacre in ever city in America. But at least we won't have an "imminent Christian theocracy". Diana Hsieh and mainstream Objectivism can rest easy.


Re Doug's comment

gregster's picture

But so foolish and dogmatic is the Objectivist movement (with some notable exceptions) One exception is Andrew Bernstein. I've found myself agreeing with his chapter Defeating Islamic Totalitarianism in Capitalist Solutions. I'll give reasons.

Important Videos from Doug

Rosie's picture

Excellent, very powerful words from Paul Weston of LibertyGB from the UK.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

Doug

i.am.dan.edge's picture

edit

A rare man

Doug Bandler's picture

What do you make of it?

A rare man. He's right. Muslims should be deported. And what he's getting at is what Objectivism has not wrestled with in any systematic way; namely the problem of aggregates which is itself related to the issue of culture and immigration. If you allow members of a hostile culture to immigrate into your nation THEY WILL ATTEMPT TO CHANGE YOUR CULTURE. Throw in the fact that the West is now TOTALLY controlled by the Left and immigration of Muslims is pure suicide. But so foolish and dogmatic is the Objectivist movement (with some notable exceptions) that they won't even CONSIDER this point of view. Its that ignorance dressed up in moral self-righteousness which make me furious.

As for Khodeir Tahir, I would allow men like him to stay in America IF he renounced Islam. The standard Objectivist argument is that a policy like mine would be cruel to Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Wafa Sultan, etc. But that's not the case. If a former Muslim renounces Islam and understands that it is a source of evil, I don't have any problem with them living in America. They are model immigrants.

Sad thing about this is that I bet mainstream Objectivism would consider Tahir a "collectivist" or a "determinist". Maybe he just doesn't understand Islam?

Lews was flawed in his knowledge

Doug Bandler's picture

Based on my study of military history, I was very convinced by Dr. John Lewis's solution to Totalitarian Islam.

Lewis was wrong.

He still viewed this war through the lens of nation state warfare. I don't understand how he could think that. And he did not understand Islam as evidenced by the fact that he used the expression "totalitarian Islam" which is a major indicator of ignorance of the core essence of Islam. The whole concept of "de-Islamifying" an Islamic country is beyond ridiculous. It shows how even smart Objectivists don't understand the importance of culture. It also shows how most Objectivists don't understand the Islamic world; namely that its family structure which is dominated by father-brother-daughter inter-cousin marriage renders it the most tribalistic and thus close minded culture in the world. Throw in Islam and there is no changing a culture like that short of out right colonization.

Lewis was a good man and he died too soon. But his understanding of this war was flawed at deep levels. Objectivism has not produced a war theorist who understands the Islamo-Western conflict. We have men like Brook, Tracinski and Lewis all groping in the dark and ignoring or evading the core problems: Islam and Muslim immigration. And as I keep saying, the reason for this is at root a problem that Objectivism has with properly defining the parameters of individualism in a political context. This renders them terrified of challenging open borders dogma; witness the insanity being penned by an otherwise intelligent man - Harry Binswanger.

War Policy

i.am.dan.edge's picture

Doug and Others,

Based on my study of military history, I was very convinced by Dr. John Lewis's solution to Totalitarian Islam. I'm not familiar with Dr. Brook's recent comments on the subject, but he seemed in line with Lewis's view several years back.

In any case, could y'all refer me to threads on SOLO that engage Lewis/Brook's arguments directly? Preferably with documentation? I don't want to start a round of discussion that has already been settled elsewhere.

Thanks,

--Dan Edge

Im liking that

Jules Troy's picture

That is pretty impressive as far as admitting the problem.  Of course If I were to write that article I would be branded a racist/religious hate monger /islamophobic right winger.  

I imagine he will be branded a traitor by his own people at the least and probably some crazy f#%king muslim will cut his head off for being an apostate Or "race traitor".

It is however refreshing to say the least to see this recognition of the dilemma facing western civilization penned by one of their own people and I salute him for his bravery.

Chance Meetings on Aeroplanes

Rosie's picture

I made a new friend out of the person sitting next to me on an aeroplane the other day through a mutual love of words - and a crossword! After a while of my secretly looking at it, when he became "stuck", I couldn't help but lean conspiratorially towards him slightly and whisper, "I know the answer to 8 down!" And so began one of those chance meetings that leads to great conversation, a quick recognition of mutual sympat and a potential friendship when he asked if I might like to continue our conversation over a coffee when we both returned to Wellington!

He is a journalist, a writer of several books and was the NZ-based journalist for the Guardian. He is a Jew who lived for a while in Israel and was the writer of this article. At the end of the this blogpost about his article, there is a link to suggest that NZ is included in the Islamic threat. The link did not work for me so I found the website and tried to locate it that way without success as it doesn't have search engine on the website. But I did find an article and one comment written on 27 May 2013 by a Muslim that surprised me greatly and which I thought might interest and surprise you too.

It is titled Why won’t Europe deport all Muslims and be done with terrorism?

What do you make of it?

NIOF in action

Doug Bandler's picture

Yes, of course; mine is a libertarian household. But if either had chosen to listen to him a second time without earplugs I might have had to issue some authority on the basis of non-initiation of harm to the rest of us!

Beiber's music as a violation of the NIOF principle. As the British say, BRILLIANT!!

Doug

Rosie's picture

Thanks for the link.

You're welcome. Did you notice on the left there is a title "Atlas Shrugs"? It is the website of Pamela Geller. She is a most remarkably able, intelligent woman.

Did you approve the content of the 18 point plan?

But organized Objectivism considers you, a Christian, a greater threat to Western Civilization than Islam.

Haha. Perhaps they heard about the recent burnt offerings to my children!

Well maybe. You are letting your children listen to Justin Beiber!!

Yes, of course; mine is a libertarian household. But if either had chosen to listen to him a second time without earplugs I might have had to issue some authority on the basis of non-initiation of harm to the rest of us!

Pay

Jules Troy's picture

Pay no attention to the fact that Beiber is from Canada!

"Spits".

Rosie

Doug Bandler's picture

Thanks for the link. Diana West and Robert Spencer (and others) have often cited an FBI report (I believe) that shows that 80% of US mosques are peddling Jihad propaganda; i.e. assisting Jihad. That's 4 out of every 5. What more can be said? Muslims are a 5th column. The Left is apologizing for them the way it did for Communism for over half a century (and still does).

I'm a broken record on this because the truth doesn't change. But organized Objectivism considers you, a Christian, a greater threat to Western Civilization than Islam.

Well maybe. You are letting your children listen to Justin Beiber!!

Call to Close Three US Mosques

Rosie's picture

The human rights organization American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI) has called upon government and law enforcement authorities to close three U.S. mosques that have been established as breeding grounds for jihad terror. AFDI claims that to investigate and shut down mosques breeding jihad terror would not be a breach of the First Amendment since Islam is a political movement.

The call follows the issuance last week of AFDI's 18-point Platform for Defending Freedom, which offered practical steps to protect the nation from jihad terror in the wake of the Boston jihad bombings, including:

"AFDI calls for an immediate halt of immigration by Muslims into nations that do not currently have a Muslim majority population. "

Out-migration

Doug Bandler's picture

Auster advocated a reverse immigration for Muslims. This is also what Geert Wilders advocates. Wilders argues that we should PAY Muslims to leave while simultaneously halting all Islamic immigration. That combined with a massive distrust and animosity directed at Islam and Muslims from the citizenry would be enough to send the overwhelming majority of Muslims packing. That last point would probably happen automatically from normal Westerners; they would normally hate Islam and Muslims. However, the Left (and libertarians and mainstream O'ists) and weak Conservatives (like Bush) prevent this.

But Auster's main point was that this IS doable IF the culture had the will. But not even Objectivists are on board with this. Which shows how suicidal Westerners are.

And thus my anger...

Muslims and Christians

Kyrel Zantonavitch's picture

Doug -- I agree with you and Larry Auster.

I'm not an expert on either Islam or Christianity. I find both of their holy books stunningly boring, and can't seem to force myself to read them, even tho' I've tried innumerable times. All I know is small excerpts from them, plus a ton of commentary about them. Based on that, however, it seems that Christianity is every bit as bad in theory as Islam. And the practice of the Christians during the Dark Age was almost as bad as the Muslims today. That said...

I want the Muslims deported from America, and not the Christians (yet). Any Muslim who is truly sympathetic to jihad (Muslim-style war) and sharia (Muslim-style slavery) should have his citizenship taken and be tossed out as an objective threat (to life, liberty, and property). This isn't "racism" or "Islamophobia" or "intolerance" on my part, as far as I can tell, but rather a proper, rational, moral response to a genuine and true enemy. Muslims are the aggressors. They need to somehow learn to stop attacking us, and leave Americans alone. Muslims of any level of sincerity (in belief and practice) are objective threats and true enemies of America, and all the Western nations, in my view. They need to be expelled.

Obama's FBI blinkered

gregster's picture

Russia is more effective against slime.

"The conversations are significant because, had they been revealed earlier, they might have been enough evidence for the FBI to initiate a more thorough investigation of the Tsarnaev family.

As it was, Russian authorities told the FBI only that they had concerns that Tamerlan and his mother were religious extremists. With no additional information, the FBI conducted a limited inquiry and closed the case in June 2011."

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/worl...

Illustrated

gregster's picture

 

 


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.