Democracy: The Trojan Horse for Islamization, Part 4

The West's "Muslim immigrant problem" --- special problem may require special measures...

---

What Islam wants?

In a previous article “Three Decrees of Islam”, I have mentioned that as a creed, Islam is not a religion like Hinduism, Buddhism or Jainism. In fact, Islam is a non-spiritual, violent and totalitarian political creed and its aim is to create an Islamic, rather Arab-Islamic religious empire, throughout the world. This creed rests on three fundamental postulates: (i) Millat and Kufr, (ii) dar-ul-Islam and dar-ul-harb, and (iii) Jihad. It should be mentioned here that the real meaning of Islam is, not peace, but surrender unconditionally to the dictates of Allah’s Koran and Prophet Muhammad.

The Arabic word Millat stands for brotherhood or community (of Muslims) and the word 'Kufr' stands for “to disbelieve” or “to oppose”. Those, who do kufr, are kafirs. The first postulate Millat and Kufr says that those, who surrender to the Koran and Prophet Muhammad, are imandar Mussalman and those, who do not, belong to the despicable species of kafirs. So, according to Islamic theology, each and every non-Muslim is a kafir, while all Muslims are brothers (kulla muslemein ikhuatun) and all kafirs are enemies of the Muslims. Most importantly, Islam divides the entire humanity into two camps: 1) the Muslim-camp, and 2) the kafir-camp.

The second postulate ‘dar-ul-Islam and dar-ul-harb’ of Islam tells that all the countries on the earth can broadly be divided into two categories. Dar-ul-Islam comprises of those countries that have already come under the domination of Islam. The literal meaning of dar-ul-harb is the 'land of warfare'. It refers to those countries which have not yet been conquered by Islam or come under Islamic control and Muslims must fight with those kafir nations to bring them under their control. The ultimate aim of Islam is to turn the entire world into a dar-ul-Islam, i.e. to bring the entire world under the banner of Islam. So the Koran says: “Go on fighting against them till the rule of Allah is not established (8.39).”

How to bring the entire world under the banner of Islam or convert all of the dar-ul-harb into dar-ul-Islam? Here the third decree of Islam, jihad, comes into play. In plain words, jihad means unconditional and indiscriminate war against the kafirs for killing them and enslaving them, raping their women, plundering their wealth, occupying their land and confiscating their properties. A Muslim participating in Jihad is called a mujahid (plural mujahidin) and Allah’s ultimate intention is to raise and establish His religion to reign supreme with the help of the mujahidin. Therefore, the terrorists are Allah’s mujahidin and their aim is to abolish the kafir-camp, or cause harm to it. Even seducing or raping kafir women is a part of Jihad. Islamic jihad, in fact, is the most barbaric incitement, the world has ever seen, to commit indiscriminate and large-scale homicide. For a Muslim, launching a jihad or war against the kafirs is the highest virtue, even higher than pilgrimage to Mecca (hajj), not to speak of lower virtues like prayer (namaj) and fasting (roja).

Regarding Jihad, Allah says:

• “Fighting against the kafirs is beyond one’s personal likings and dislikings as Allah has commanded to fight the pagans and all those who ascribe partners (shirk) with Allah” (2.216).
• “That you believe in Allah and His Messenger and that you strive hard and fight in the cause of Allah with your wealth and lives” (61.11).
• “Jihad is better for you than your sitting back at home and if you do so, He will forgive you your sins, your foulest deeds and admit you into the gardens of eternity (paradise)” (61.12).
• “There is nothing in the sight of Allah which may be equated to jihad.” (9.19)

So, Ayatollah Khomeini, the leader of Islamic Revolution in Iran said:

“Jihad means the conquest of all non-Muslim territories. Such a war may well be declared after the formation of an Islamic government worth of that name …It will then be the duty of every able-bodied adult male Moslem to volunteer for this war of conquest, the final aim of which is to put Koranic law in power from one end of the earth to the other. …We have no recourse other than to overthrow all governments that do not rest on pure Islamic principles. …That is not only our duty in Iran, but it is also the duty of all Moslem in the world, in all Muslim countries to carry the Islamic political revolution to its final victory.”

According to Sheikh Ahmed Ismail Hassan Yassin, the revered founder and spiritual leader of Hamas, Islam said:

“Kill all the unbelievers just as they would kill you all! Does this mean that Muslims should sit back until they are devoured by [the unbelievers]? Islam says: Kill them [the non-Muslims], put them to the sword and scatter [their armies]. Does this mean sitting back until [non-Muslims] overcome us? ….Kill in the service of Allah those who may want to kill you! Does this mean that we should surrender [to the enemy]? Islam says: Whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword and in the shadow of the sword! People cannot be made obedient except with the sword! The sword is the key to Paradise, which can be opened only for the Holy Warriors! Sons of Islam everywhere, the jihad is a duty - to establish the rule of Allah on earth and to liberate your countries and yourselves from America's domination and its Zionist allies, it is your battle - either victory or martyrdom”.

He has also claimed responsibility for a number of suicide attacks targeting Israeli civilians.

Reality of the Muslim immigrants

So, it becomes evident that the immigrant Muslims, who come to European countries to work as laborers, in the true principles of Islam, are the Mujahids or soldiers of Allah, who must ideally fight the kafirs, wherever they are. In the core of their heart, they cherish the desire to see the host country turn Islamic or into a dar-ul-Islam, in one way or another. But the democratic states treat these treacherous infiltrators as simple citizens. This enables them to proceed smoothly toward realizing their hidden agenda. These adversaries of democracy fully exploit the democratic rights like freedom of religion, freedom of expression etc. to convert the indigenous Christians to Islam and silently go on increasing their kind by rapid breeding, so that they will be able to overthrow the present democratic governments by democratic election when they gain numerical majority.

Muslims trampling and tearing national flag of USA

There, the democratic governments of Europe are failing to tackle these foreign adversaries of their own with their liberal-democratic laws. Moreover, the political parties of these host countries, necessitated by the greed for staying in power, are wooing or appeasing them for grab their votes, which is also helping Muslims realize the hidden agenda with ease. The situation has worsened to an extent that the British government has submitted to the Muslim demands by allowing them run a parallel judicial system based on Koranic law or Shariah. France has started allowing Muslims to practice polygamy and genital mutilation (FGM) of young girls. Recently a French court in Lille also annulled Muslim marriage, because the wife was a virgin. A judge in the UK has given lighter sentence to an offender, because he is a devout Muslim. Police force has been instructed to deal Muslim and non-Muslim criminals differently. Most interestingly, even non-Muslims in Muslim-dominated localities in France have been prohibited to serve pork and wine in a feast.

These appeasement policies have embolden Muslims to break any law and intensify their jihadi activities, because they could have understood that the Muslim-appeasing governments and their law enforcing authorities would turn a blind eye not to annoy them, lest they earn their displeasure for fear of losing their votes. So, the immigrant Muslims organize mass protests for any trifle reasons, shout slogans against the governments, trample and burn the national flags of the host countries on open roads, while police remain silent spectators.

How to counter the immigrant Muslims' design for the Islamization of Europe

The political leaders in Western countries must understand that their hard-earned freedom is the most precious thing that humankind has attained, which they must preserve and defend at all cost. And they must also realize that Muslims are an enemy of that freedom. They must take Muslims' words for it. They must look at the Islamic world to understand it. And they must understand that when Muslims become the majority or the dominant group in the population, liberal-democracy would not last under their present psyche. Politicians in Western countries must also understand that whether political rivalry or the greed to stay in power is not worth the Islamic slavery of their motherland. They should realize that the civilization they have built up must not be allowed to move backward.

With this understanding, they may have to take every measures that would help reduce the rate of Muslim breeding (such as forcing family planning, cutting/abolishing welfare, reduce or stop Muslim immigration), take hard measures to assimilate Muslims, to change their psyche, instead of appeasing them and even deport those Muslims, who would not assimilate or oppose cultures and system of governance of their host countries. While such measures appear harsh or uncivilized for the present liberal democratic world, the liberal democracies must also realize that Muslim immigrants are the most difficult problem they may ever have to tackle in order to preserve itself. In this context, it is pertinent to include Danish psychologist Nicholai Sennels' observation of Muslim immigrants in Denmark:

“From my experiences with the 150 Muslims I have had in therapy, only a handful felt themselves to be Danish. Most saw themselves as Somalis, Turks, Moroccans, Pakistanis, and Iraqis who now live in Denmark. Almost none of them saw themselves as an integrated part of the Danish society….This was a real shock to me. Many of my Muslim clients were second or even third generation immigrants, but, still they did not feel Danish. Actually it seemed that many of them were even more religious and hateful towards non-Muslims than their first generation immigrant parents.”

It has also been mentioned that a French survey in Le Figaro showed that only 14 percent of the country’s estimated five million Muslims see themselves as ‘more French than Muslim’. …Only 12 percent of Muslims living in Germany see themselves as more German than Muslim. … A Danish survey published by the pro-Muslim pro-democratic organization Democratic Muslims led by the Danish PM and Muslim Naser Khader showed that, “Only 14 percent of Muslims living in Denmark could identify themselves as democratic and Danish”, Sennels adds.

The above discussions obviate the fact that Muslim immigrants in the European countries will never be loyal to the host country and assimilate themselves with European societies. They will be, first and foremost, Muslim and Islamic. Therefore, when they become the majority --- which they will under the present demographic trend --- their host country will become Islamic countries; they won't remain liberal democratic anymore. One may take a look at the Muslim-majority nations to realize what it may become of Europe when Muslims gain majority in a few decades.

Let me conclude by emphasizing that if the Western Liberal Democracies want to preserve their political and cultural ethos, they can't treat their "Muslim immigrant problem" with liberal democratic values. Unconventional, even somewhat unethical, measures would be needed to frustrate the design Muslims have in their heart for turning Europe into an Islamic continent. If not, another Dark Age, an Age of Islamic Slavery, would befall the entire humanity.

Democracy: The Trojan Horse for Islamization, Part 3

How Democratic politics are faciliatating the Islimization of Europe and other democratic non-Muslim nations???

---

[ Part 1 - Part 2 - Part 3 ]

Political Rivalry: It has been mentioned in the previous article that that in 711, Moors, after the Umayyad conquest of Hispania, occupied large parts of the Iberian Peninsula establishing the Al-Andalus (Moorish Spain). Incidentally, the Islamic caliphate had not yet targeted Spain for conquest, but a political rivalry in the Visigothic kingdom, between King Roderrick and Count Julian created an opportunity that Tariq and his army to attack Spain before an order was issued from Damascus. Thus, the political rivalry among the Visigoths culminated into the Islamic slavery of Spain that lasted for over 700 years, up to 1492.

It was also mentioned that in India, there was bitter rivalry between Prithwiraj Chauhan, the Emperor of Delhi, and Jaichand, the king of Kannauj. This rivalry led Jaichand to invite Muhammad Ghori to invade Delhi. Jaichand is said to have provided active support to the Muslim army. Ultimately Prithwiraj was defeated and killed by the army of Muhammad Ghori, which initiated the Muslim rule in India that lasted for more than 700 years.

We may add another example in this context. In the 18^th century, the Hindus of Bengal, to get rid of the tyrannical Muslim ruler Nawab Siraj-ud-daula, entered into a conspiracy with Lord Clive, the then Governor General of British East India Company and according to this conspiracy the British army won the decisive battle at Plassey in 1757 and thus initiated the British slavery in India that lasted for nearly 200 years, up to August 15, 1947.

These incidents show how disastrous it can be to invite foreign enemies in solving internal rivalry between the rulers of the Middle Ages. It is a matter of serious concern that similar rivalry and bitterness has now appeared among the political parties in the democratic world. In the Middle Ages, this enmity and rivalry ended up in bloody battles that have now been replaced by the battle of ballots. In those days, the rival kings sought military help even from the enemies of the nation; today, the hostile political parties are appeasing the enemies of the nation for votes. Or more pointedly, they are appeasing Muslims for their votes.

Political enmity and Muslim appeasement: In this context, we may cite the example of the rival political between the Labour Party and the Conservative Party in the UK. All over the world, the Leftists are more sympathetic to Muslims. Accordingly, the Labour Party in the UK had a sweet relationship with immigrant Muslims. But this sweet relationship turned sour when the Labour Government sent troops to Afghanistan and Iraq. This development led the Labour MP Gerald Hain to say (May 12, 2008): “Labour needs to change tack on foreign policy to win back voters, who deserted the party over the Iraq war. …. Hundreds of thousands of Muslims had been lost to Labour as a result of the worsening situation in Iraq. …We must win back Muslim voters.”

This Muslim appeasing also has its telling effect on the Labour Party as says a political analyst: “Labour is steadily losing support among ordinary Britons, including some alienated sections of the working class. They so heartily despise, as people are increasingly starting to realise what they are about. It is sheer desperation, an unscrupulous attempt to cling onto power whatever the price may be. And without a doubt the Islamic scum will demand a heavy price for the support this despicable government so desperately needs.”

Nonetheless, as Muslims started deserting Labour, the Conservatives started wooing them. Political analyst David Sapsted wrote on April 17, 2010: “The Muslim votes would be a crucial element when both the Labour and Conservative parties are fighting a close battle to get an overall majority in the 646-seat parliament.” The present Conservative Government's Muslim appeasement is seen in its shameless submission to the Muslim demands in an instruction issued by the Bedfordshire Police on December 12, 2010, regarding how to deal with the terrorists and dangerous criminals (For detail, see “Highly Deplorable Religious Discrimination in the UK”). It is surprising that Great Britain, considered to be one of the pioneers for establishing democracy based on individual equality and freedom, can indulge in such a biased and religiously discriminatory policy. This directly contradicts the very foundation Liberal Democracy. It is to be noted here that in democracies, political parties have to depend on the voters to stay in power. But such a need does not arise in a totalitarian state, like the Communist China or Saudi Arabia.

Muslim appeasement in other democratic countries: France is another democratic country in Europe. Here, it is not possible for single political party to win election and form the government. “French politics are characterised by two politically opposed groupings: one left-wing, centred around the French Socialist Party, and the other right-wing, centred previously around the Rassemblement pour la République (RPR) and now its successor the Union for a Popular Movement (UMP). The executive branch is currently composed mostly of the UMP.” The rivalry between these two groupings has given rise to naked appeasement of the Muslim voters. Recently Ali Khalaf in his article “France: Most Islam Friendly Kafir Country” has nicely narrated the present French Government’s shocking appeasement of Muslims. [2]

India is a democratic country where Muslims constitute about 15% of the total population. In the political scenario of India, there a few national political parties like the National Congress, the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPIM) and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), and there are many regional parties. All these political parties are openly appeasing the Muslims, by whatever means they can, to grab their votes. In the state of West Bengal (WB), the Left Front (a coalition of the leftist parties led by CPIM) came to power with the help of Muslim votes and stayed in power for the past 30 years. But at present, the regional party, the Trinamool Congress, led by Mamata Banerji, has succeeded in winning over the Muslims through more attractive and lucrative promises. So, in the last Parliamentary Election held in 2009, the Left Front suffered a setback. Most of the people of the state have already started to believe that in the coming Assembly Election to be held in April or May, 2011, Muslim votes would go to Trinamool Congress, and Mamata Banerji would be the next Chief Minister of the state.

The result of Muslim appeasement: The question naturally arises: Can we equate today’s Muslim appeasement with inviting foreign Muslim enemies by the discontented Count Julian of Spain or Jaichand of Kanauj. The reply is: “Yes”. In those days, inviting foreign Muslim powers led to Islamic slavery and, in a similar manner, today’s Muslim appeasement would lead to the same: slavery to Muslim domination. Today’s politicians, due to their inadequate understanding of Muslim psyche, or knowing everything well and just to fool and mislead the non-Muslim population of the country, are propagating the notion that the Muslim immigrants are just like any other immigrant groups. They also propagate the wrong notion that, like other immigrant groups, Muslim will also finally integrate with the indigenous people and adopt local culture.

So, Labour MP Barry Gardner, in commenting on the Muslims of the Wembly area of London, said: “But I say that those people are British. They are proud to be British. They are proud to be a part of this society. And I am proud to represent the most multicultural borough in this country and indeed in Europe. We have more than hundred and sixty different first languages spoken in our borough and hundred and thirty different first languages spoken in our schools. We are proud of that and we are proud of the fact that by the time our children reach to go to secondary schools, that they are achieving above the national average at the key stage two. Every single one of these schools in Britain. These children are our future.” But the stern reality is that, those Muslim children in due course of time will turn the UK into an Islamic state by simple majority.

Danish Psychologist's study of Muslim psyche: Recently, Nicholai Sennels, a Danish psychologist, has made a highly laudable research on Islamic psyche and published his results in his article “Muslims and Westerners: The Psychological Differences”. Sennels, as a psychologist, have more than a hundred Muslim clients, and this has provided him an excellent opportunity to study and observe minds of Muslim immigrants in Denmark. On the criminal propensity of immigrant Muslims, Sennels says: “We should stop talking about "criminal foreigners" and start using the more precise term, "criminal Muslims. …A serious discussion about the relationship between the Muslim culture and criminal, antisocial behavior is, indeed, very much needed.” He is also writing a book, entitled “Among Criminal Muslims: A Psychologist's Experiences from the Copenhagen Municipality”.

To quote from above article:

He says, “After having consulted with 150 young Muslim clients in therapy and 100 Danish clients (who, on average, shared the same age and social background as their Muslim inmates), my findings were that the “Muslims’ cultural and religious experiences played a central role in their psychological development and criminal behavior or Criminal foreigners". He also says, “According to official statistics from Danmarks Statistik, all non-Muslim groups of immigrants are less criminal than the ethnic Danes. Even after adjusting, according to educational and economic levels, all Muslim groups are more criminal than any other ethnic group. Seven out of 10, in the youth prison, where I worked, were Muslim.”

The Muslim way of howing anger

He says that the Muslims, as a community, are angry and often express their anger. In this regard, he says, “In the Muslim culture, aggressive behavior, especially threats, are generally seen to be accepted, and even expected as a way of handling conflicts and social discrepancies. If a Muslim does not respond in a threatening way to insults or social irritation, he, not "she" (Muslim women are, mostly, expected to be humble and to not show power) is seen as weak. In the eyes of civilized people, it looks immature and childish when people try to use threatening behavior. “The Islamic expression of "holy anger" is therefore completely contradictory to any Western society”, he says.

Sennels have found another important difference between the Westerners and the Muslim immigrants and says, “Westerners feel that their lives are mainly influenced by inner forces – ourselves. But Muslims have something else. They have strict external rules, traditions and laws for human behavior (as ordained by Allah in the Koran). They have a God that decides their life's course. "Inshallah" follows every statement about future plans; if God wants it to happen. They have powerful Muslim clerics who set the directions for their community every Friday. These clerics dictate political views.”

Will Muslims integrate in Western societies: As mentioned, the Muslim-appeasing politicians, either due to their inadequate understanding of Islam or to mislead the common people, propagate the idea that Islam is a 'religion of peace', and in the long run, Muslims will assimilate the Western way of life. But, all evidence suggests this is impossible. From the very childhood, they are trained to hate whatever is un-Islamic. They learn to hate non-Muslims as kafirs, and to hate their culture and customs. As soon as pious Muslims set their foot in a non-Muslim country, their Islamic teachings tell them: “You are entering a kafir country, a land of your enemies. You must not take them as friend. It is a dar-ul-harb, a land of war, and you have to conquer this country for Islam to turn it into a dar-ul-Islam." So, it is next to impossible to make them loyal to the host country and adapt them to its culture.

While commenting on this aspect of immigrant Muslims, Sennels writes, “European, Australian and North American politicians have spent trillions of Euros and Dollars in trying to avoid the apparently unavoidable: the failed integration of Muslims. Money has been spent on voluntary offers that our badly integrated foreigners can use if they want. They do sometimes try, but it very seldom works. What we have to understand is that we are dealing with people who grew up in cultures with an "outer - locus of control." Self reflection and self responsibility have much less importance to them.”

“We should not permit the destruction of our cities by lawless parallel societies, with groups of roaming criminal Muslims overloading of our welfare system and the growing justified fear that non-Muslims have of violence. The consequences should be so strict that it would be preferable for any anti-social Muslim to go back to a Muslim country, where they can understand, and can be understood by their own culture. …We should not permit the destruction of our cities by lawless parallel societies - Muslim gangs in Melbourne. …From my experiences with the 150 Muslims I have had in therapy, only a handful felt themselves to be Danish. Most saw themselves as Somalis, Turks, Moroccans, Pakistanis, and Iraqis who now live in Denmark. Almost none of them saw themselves as an integrated part of the Danish society”, Sennels adds.

It has been mentioned that the British Labour MP Barry Gardner, when speaking in the House of Commons, said that the children of the immigrants will feel proud to be a British citizens. It could be true for the immigrants of other religious groups, but not for the Muslims. While commenting on this aspect, Sennels says, “This was a real shock to me. Many of my Muslim clients were second or even third generation immigrants, but, still they did not feel Danish. Actually it seemed that many of them were even more religious and hateful towards non-Muslims than their first generation immigrant parents.”

“A French survey in Le Figaro showed that only 14 percent of the country's estimated five million Muslims see themselves as ‘more French than Muslim’. …Only 12 percent of Muslims living in Germany see themselves as more German than Muslim. …A Danish survey published by the pro-Muslim pro-democratic organization Democratic Muslims led by the Danish PM and Muslim Naser Khader showed that “Only 14 percent of Muslims living in Denmark could identify themselves as democratic and Danish", Sennels adds.

It, thus, becomes evident that Muslim immigrants in European countries will never assimilate themselves with Western societies and are determined to retain their Muslim identity. They are not loyal to their adopted countries; on the contrary, they are trying their best to conquer it for Islam by over populating the indigenous Christians through rapid breeding. So, a concerted effort of all the political parties of all the affected countries is the needed to frustrate their design of turning Europe into an Islamic continent.

Democracy: The Trojan Horse for the Islamization of Europe, Part 1

As concern the Islamization of Europe: Democracy – Thou art a Trojan horse.

---

The Hindi proverb “Loha Loheko Kaat-ta hai” means “iron cuts iron”. The meaning is obvious. One cannot cut iron with copper, bronze or brass. You can cut iron only with tempered steel. Similar is the case with Islam. Today, Islam is the most stubborn, savage and uncivilized totalitarian creed. It is not possible to tackle such a cruel and violent creed with the liberal and civilized legal system of modern democracy. It has to be tackled with firm, effective measures. The Muslims in non-Muslims countries are using the liberal and democratic laws of the host countries to multiply their kind so as to gain in strength. The purpose, or the ultimate impact of it, would be: overpopulate the native population and conquer those nations through a nonviolent, even somewhat democratic, way.

In the olden days of dictatorial and totalitarian monarchy in Europe, Muslims had to fight with European forces to make their foothold in that continent. In 711, Moors, after the Umayyad conquest of Hispania, occupied large parts of the Iberian Peninsula establishing the Al-Andalus (Moorish Spain), but further advancement was arrested. That monarchy, today, has been replaced by democracy, which is facilitating the Muslim invasion of European countries as they come in as innocent immigrants, who are treated as civilian residents and even valued citizens. It can also be recalled that European monarchies had once organized the Crusades in order to recover Jerusalem from the Muslim occupation. But in today’s democratic Europe, organizing such an effort would be impossible. In this context, it would be relevant to discuss the Muslim conquest of Spain.

Islam in Spain

Islamic rule in Spain began with the Umayyad conquest of Hispania in 711 and lasted until 1492, when the Muslims of Granada were either converted to Christianity or massacred or driven out. Hispania was the Latin name given to the whole Iberian Peninsula (covering the territories of present-day Spain and Portugal). After the fall of the Western Roman Empire (476 AD), the Teutonic tribe of Visigoths captured and ruled the whole peninsula until the Islamic conquest. It is frequently stated in historical sources that Spain was one of the former Roman provinces where the Latin language and culture grew deep roots. After the fall of the Empire, the Visigoths continued that tradition by becoming probably the most Romanized of all Teutonic tribes.

On April 30 of 711, Berber leader Tariq ibn-Ziyad landed at Gibraltar and by the end of the campaign in most of the Iberian Peninsula (except for small areas in the north-west such as Asturias and the Basque territory) were brought under Islamic rule. The turning-point of the campaign was the battle of Guadalete, where the Visigothic king Roderick was defeated and killed on the battlefield. After a eight-year-long campaign, Muslim forces attempted to move north-east across the Pyrenees Mountains toward France, but were defeated by the Frankish Catholic Charles Martel at the Battle of Tours in 732. In fact, all areas previously under the rule of the Visigoths went under Islamic rule.

Islamic rule in the Iberian peninsula lasted for varying periods ranging from only 28 years in the extreme northwest (Galicia) to 781 years in the area surrounding the city of Granada in the southeast.

Lessons from Granada

Resistance to Muslim occupation started since the very beginning. And as Muslims were successively ousted from parts of Spain, their last fortess of power was a small settlement called Granada (88 sq. Km.), situated at the foot of the Sierra Nevada mountains, at the confluence of three rivers, Beiro, Darro and Genil---now a province of Spain.

On January 2, 1492, the last Muslim sultan in Iberia, Emir Muhammad XII, known as Boabdil to the Spanish, surrendered complete control of Emirate of Granada, to Ferdinand II and Isabella I after the last battle of the Granada.

By 1499, the Muslims and Jews of Spain were given a choice of baptism or emigration. As a result, the Muslim population of Spain were subjected to persecution, execution, or exile---a treatment, which is now unthinkable in Europe. It nonetheless brought peace in Europe, which is now being perturbed again by the new influx of Muslims as refugees and immigrants. As of 2007^[update], an estimated over 1 million Muslims live in Spain and most of them are recent immigrants from North Africa, Middle East, and South Asia; although there are some 20,000 converts.

Ottoman Empire and Europe

Similar is the history of the invasion of Europe by the Ottoman Turks. During the 8^th and 9^th centuries, Turkish nomadic tribes converted to Islam, were pressured out of their homes in the Asian steppes by the Mongols. One of the Turkish tribes, the Seljuk, had become a significant power in the Islamic world. However, many other Turkish groups remained nomadic, sought to conquer land for Islam and to acquire war booty for themselves. This led them into conflict with the Seljuk Turks, and to pacify the nomadic tribes, the Seljuks directed them to the eastern domain of the Byzantine Empire, Anatolia. The tribe known as the Ottomans arose from one of the smaller emirates established in northwestern Anatolia after 1071. The dynasty was named for Osman (1259-1326), who began to expand his kingdom into the Byzantine Empire in Asia Minor, moving his capital to Bursa in 1326. The empire lasted from 1299 to 1923. At the height of its power, in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the empire spanned three continents, controlling much of Southeastern Europe, Western Asia and North Africa during the reign of Suleiman the Magnificent (r. 1520-1566), the empire was at the center of interactions between the Eastern and Western worlds for six centuries.

In the century after the death of Osman I, Ottoman rule began to extend over the Eastern Mediterranean and the Balkans. The important city of Thessaloniki was captured from the Venetians in 1387. The Turkish victory at the Battle of Kosovoin 1389 effectively marked the end of Serbian power in the region, paving the way for Ottoman expansion into Europe. The Battle of Nicopolis in 1396, widely regarded as the last large-scale crusade of the Middle Ages, failed to stop the advance of the victorious Ottomans. To consolidate his claim, Mehmed II wanted to gain control over the Western capital, Rome, and Ottoman forces occupied parts of the Italian Peninsula.

Later on, the Ottoman conquest of Constantinople in 1453 by Mehmed II cemented the status of the Empire as the preeminent power in southeastern Europe and the eastern Mediterranean. During this time, the Ottoman Empire entered a long period of conquest and expansion, extending its borders deep into Europe and North Africa.

Selim's successor, Suleiman the Magnificent (1520–1566), further expanded upon Selim's conquests. After capturing Belgrade in 1521, Suleiman conquered the southern and central parts of the Kingdom of Hungary.

He then laid siege to Vienna in 1529, but failed to take the city after the onset of winter forced his retreat.^[20] In 1532, he made another attack on Vienna with an army thought to be over 250,000 strong, but was repulsed 97 kilometres (60 mi) south of the city at the fortress of Güns.

As a treachery, France united with the Ottoman Empire, as their mutual opposition to Habsburg rule in both Southern and Central Europe, became strong allies during this period. The alliance was economic and military, as the sultans granted France the right of trade within the Empire without levy of taxation. By this time, the Ottoman Empire was a significant and accepted part of the European political sphere. It made a military alliance with France, the Kingdom of England and the Dutch Republic against Habsburg Spain, Italy and Habsburg Austria.

Battle of Vienna in 1683, which marked the end of Ottoman expansion into Europe. In the final assault the Ottoman forces were swept away by allied Habsburg, German and Polish forces spearheaded by the Polish king Jan Sobieski at the Battle of Vienna. Then after the Treaty of Karlowitz (January 26, 1699), which ended the Great Turkish War, the Ottoman Empire was forced to surrender control of significant European territories.

The Ottoman Empire came to an end, as a regime under an imperial monarchy, on November 1, 1922. It formally ended on July 24, 1923 under the Treaty of Lausanne. It was succeeded by the Republic of Turkey, which was officially proclaimed on October 29, 1923.

Conclusion

The history of Europe, narrated above, tells us how resolutely the European monarchies had to fight for saving the continent from being overrun by the Islamic hordes – firstly by defeating the Moors in Spain in January, 1492, and secondly, by defeating the Ottoman Turks in January, 1699. But today, with liberal democracy in place as a system of governance, which demands human rights to all and is against any form of discrimination based on religion or race. But collectively Muslims are as determined as ever to fulfill their God-ordained command to conquer the world for establishing Islamic theocracy globally. And liberal democracy, undoubtedly, presents Muslims with the golden opportunity for Islamizing Europe and by extension of whole world, by over-breeding and influx of Muslim immigrants from Islamic countries.

This prospect of Islamizing Europe through increasing Muslim population through migration and fast breeding was expressed most eloquently by none other than the Libyan president Muammar Gaddafi, who said: There are signs that Allah will grant victory to Islam in Europe without swords, without guns, without conquest. We don’t need terrorists, we don’t need homicide bombers. The 50+ million Muslims (in Europe) will turn it into a Muslim continent within a few decades.

Therefore, as concern the Islamization of Europe: Democracy – Thou art a Trojan horse.

Mosques and the Islamization of America

Disguised as Religion, Islam has penetrated democracies with the aim of replacing civility and liberty with barbarism of the 7th-century Islamic theocracy and Sharia law. Islam's multi-pronged attack aims to destroy all that liberty offers.

---

America, with a long tradition of protecting religious freedom, still clings to the “hands off” practice of leaving alone any doctrine or practice billed as religion. A thorny problem is in deciding what constitutes a religion and who is to make that call. We must keep in mind that to be a loyal and faithful Muslim, a Muslim must adhere to and perform many obligatory acts, as specified in the Quran by Allah and the Hadith/Sunna, during his entire life.

The mosque serves as a house where Muslim devotees gather together for salat (prayer) and worshiping Allah and his messenger, the prophet Muhammad. Aside from worshiping Allah, a mosque is used for a variety of reasons. These meeting places are perfect warehouses of not only indoctrination, but future terrorists, who are made to read and understand the principles of Jihad, martyrdom and Dar ul Harb (“land of war”—any place not Islamacized.) Mosques cost money, and the money for these warehouses of intolerance is coming straight from Saudi Arabia, the number one terrorist state in the world.

These mosques are being infused with an activist strain of Islam, Wahhabism. If you have to ask where the Saudi’s are getting their money, you are not paying attention...it's coming from you. Not to mention, the current U.S. administration in its continuous war against the American people, is doing everything it can to accommodate the “Cordoba Initiative” project at taxpayers’ expense “that is spearheading plans to build a $100 million Islamic center at Ground Zero, the site where nearly 3,000 Americans were killed by jihadists on 9/11.” The recent CNN Poll shows 68% of American voters oppose the Ground Zero Mosque.

Those useful idiot non-Muslims who support the building of the mosque near the 9/11 site or anywhere else by invoking the ideal of religious freedom, are empowering a creed that is devoted to stamping out freedom of religion or any other form of freedom.

In this relentless campaign, the Islamists have a vast cadre of “experts,” “talking heads,” and for-purchase politicians who keep endlessly broadcasting the false mantra that Islam is a religion of peace. This latter bunch is criminally complicit in making the populace complacent and furthering the work of the Islamists.

When mosques are built, imams, mullahs or mosque elders tend to be sent to the U.S. with one clear mission: Make Islamic religion, laws, and life supreme within the Unite States or any other host country, using any and all tactics necessary. Next, from within the safety of their local mosques, they begin to use their revolting practices and wild sermonizing to force the genteel Americans to relocate to safer, less threatening neighborhoods and cities as is the case in England and other European countries.

They will elect Muslims to all positions of local influence, who will create and enforce policy according to the Sharia law. Once they have control over a town, they will begin to establish informal Sharia, and there’s nothing the government can (or will want to) do about it.

Sharia is the brutal means by which Islam controls its populations by force, intimidation, and punishments for offenses to Allah. Already in many European countries, national governments have, out of fear, given Islamic fascists the right to establish their own shadow governments within the borders of countries like Sweden and England, where they can control their own populations without accountability. Proposals for Sharia are being taken seriously by many western countries.

“According to early Muslim historians, towns that surrendered without resistance and made treaties with the Muslims gave the Muslims permission to take their churches and synagogues. One of the earliest examples of these kinds of conversions was in Damascus, Syria, where in 705 AD Umayyad caliph Al-Walid I bought the church of St. John from the Christians and had it rebuilt as a mosque in exchange for building a number of new churches for the Christians in Damascus. Overall, Abd al-Malik (Al-Waleed's father) is said to have transformed 10 churches in Damascus into mosques.”

“The process of turning churches into mosques was especially intensive in the villages where most of the inhabitants converted to Islam. The Abbasid caliph al-Ma'mun turned many churches into mosques. Ottoman Turks converted nearly all churches, monasteries, and chapels in Constantinople, including the famous Hagia Sophia, immediately after capturing the city in 1453, into mosques. In some instances mosques have been established on the places of Jewish or Christian sanctuaries associated with Biblical personalities who were also recognized by Islam.”

Again, Muslims first make their mark by establishing mosques in as many towns and cities as they can. These mosques range from the ostentatious, such as the one in Washington D.C., to the academically-cloaked university Islamic centers, to the innocuous storefront types and even prison chapels. One and all have the same aims: Hold the faithful in line, recruit as many new adherents by any and all means, and indoctrinate one and all in the imperative of Islamic conquest.

It is in these Islamic places that the impressionable young and the fanatical adults are drilled with the duty to carry out Jihad against the Dar ul Harb (“land of war”—any place not completely under the rule of Islam.)

Operating this vast network of Islamism requires significant financing. Saudi Arabia has spent over $80 billion for these operations since 1970. The other Persian Gulf States, with their treasuries flush with oil money, have done and continue to do their share of financing.

Not to be out-done by the virulent Wahhabism of the Saudis and their co-sectist Sunnis, the Islamic Republic of Iran has been bank-rolling its own array of clientele in the Middle East, much of Africa, and as far away as Southeast Asia and Latin America in a push for Shiism. The-non-Muslim world is literally caught in a pincer of the two rabid Islamic forces.

There are those who still delude themselves by preferring to believe that Islam has not made as many inroads into the United States as it has in other parts of the world, such as Europe. Facts prove otherwise.

According to a National Portrait, a survey released in April 2001, there were at least 1,209 mosques in the US. According to the latest report, this number has sky-rocketed to as many as 6,000 mosques in 2008.

“The official Saudi website reported a donation of $6 million, also in 1995, for a mosque in Cincinnati, Ohio. The website further stated, in 2000, "In the United States, the Kingdom has contributed to the establishment of the Islamic Center in Washington DC; the Omer Bin Al-Khattab Mosque in western Los Angeles, the Los Angeles Islamic Center, and the Fresno Mosque in California; the Islamic Center in Denver, Colorado; the Islamic center in Harrison, New York City; and the Islamic Center in Northern Virginia."

This entire guesstimate aside, a recent report from the FBI estimates that of the 2000 mosques in the United States, 10% preach Jihad. Welcome to the religion of peace as it is invading the land of the free to make it the land of submission. This is not some Islam-hating crackpot group reporting. It is the FBI, an agency known for its bending backward to be politically correct in tune with the rest of the administration.

In addition to the mosques already built in the land of the free, Islam is advanced by a large cadre of auxiliaries. Dr. Paul Williams (former FBI consultant, best-selling author and investigative journalist) reports that many Muslim businesses around the country conduct their regular businesses during the day and in the evening they turn their stores into Islamic gathering places. There are several thousands of these make-shift “Takeyehs”.

If only the masses of Muslims arise and carry out the orders of Allah, then we would have the promised paradise of Islam on earth as exemplified by such rules as that of the Taliban, Saudi Arabia, the Sudan, Somalia, and of course the Shiite nirvana of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

In these model Islamic societies, freedom of expression, worship, and assembly are taken away. Women are treated as chattel. Young girls are subjected to barbaric genital mutilation to make them sex slaves and birth channels without the ability to enjoy intercourse. Minors are executed, adulterers are stoned to death, thieves have their limbs amputated, and much much more. Isn’t that everyone’s idea of paradise?

What a travesty and how ironic indeed to have as many mosques as we already have in the U.S., yet, we intend to help the Islamists, building more training camps for future suicide bombers and endangering the safety of the American people and generations to come. With the average citizen, and not the devious and for-purchase-politicians, rests the solemn obligation to act, and act now, to compel our government to stem the tide of Islamism before it is too late.

It is tragic indeed that while our courageous service members are losing life and limbs in far and away places fighting Islamism, useful idiots and servile politicians of the highest rank at home bend backward to accommodate, even promote, Islamism.

There is a glimmer of hope that the American people are finally waking up to the deceit and the menace of the creed called Islam. Their opposition to the building of the mosque shows that the creeping Islamization of America is indeed something to stand against and prevent before it is too late.