The importance of the psychological aspect of
dhimmitude and how it affects our society today, cannot be stressed enough. The
idea of dhimmitude may be difficult for people to process however. I wanted therefore
to give some more examples to illustrate the presence of dhimmitude in our
society.
Since the early Sixties, the feminist movement has been
extremely vocal in advocating women’s rights. They launched a huge and
successful campaign, for equal pay and rights for women at work. They even
became passionate over inconsequential issues such as a woman’s right to work
on a nuclear submarine (locked in a tin can with 400 men for months on end).
Why then do they ignore Islamic anti-women issues such as female genital
mutilation, honour killings, women being stoned to death for adultery etc? Why
does the feminist movement keep a disciplined silence when confronted by
Islamic violence to women? The conclusion, feminists have mostly become
dhimmis.
The United Kingdom is ostensibly a Christian nation,
yet today it is becoming ever less acceptable to celebrate Christmas in public.
Councils are refusing to put up Christmas trees and shops are now selling cards
saying things like “Winter Wishes.” Even the Red Cross (which was founded by a
devout Christian) now refuses to display Nativity scenes in their windows.
Apparently the festival of “peace on earth and goodwill to all men,” might be
offensive to people of “other” religions.
The BBC now avoids using the terms AD (Year of our
Lord) or BC (Before Christ) when quoting dates, as these are derived from
Christianity. They instead use the terms CE (Common Era) or BCE (Before Common
Era). They are however happy to announce times and dates for Islamic holidays.
These are just a few of the examples of the creeping
dhimmitude in our societies, of which there are thousands; but where do these
things come from? Is political correctness just a spontaneous occurrence or is
it being driven by Islam. If so how could they be achieving this? Is this the
hallmark of a stealth takeover of our society by Islam?
These are important questions and we will examine a few
of the ways in which Islam could (and I suspect does) influence the
institutions of Western societies to facilitate this gradual Islamization. This
is a little UK centric although the same trends are in place all over the
Western World.
Influencing the Government:
Cash
When the Global Financial crisis hit in 2008 the
finances of the UK’s banking system were in tatters. Then Prime Minister Gordon
Brown panicked and jumped on a plane, presumably to secure cash from his
closest allies. Rather than heading for Washington, Brussels or Paris however,
he went straight to Riyadh (Saudi Arabia). [1]
The question is, why would the Saudi’s be willing to provide enough cash to
rescue a banking system the size of Britain’s? Even more importantly, what
would they be expecting in return? (News Flash: there is no such thing as a
free lunch). The GFC was a complete surprise to British politicians. This
suggests that it wasn’t the first time the British Government had received
Saudi cash (or promises thereof).
We all know how harmful cigarettes are and yet for
years, governments have resisted calls to restrict their use. I don’t think any
sensible person would think that this has nothing to do with the cash which
tobacco companies have lavished on politicians of all stripes.
If a tobacco company can buy favours from a democratic
government, imagine how much more influence an entire nation could have. This
would be especially true if it happened to be rich with oil wealth.
It would be easy to achieve this influence, even
without direct funding. By offering such incentives as preferential contracts
to oil companies and weapons suppliers etc. it would be possible to exert
considerable influence on democratic governments. It would be particularly
effective if these companies were large political donors in their own right.
For example, in the mid 1980’s, an arms deal between
Saudi Arabia and the UK was touted as, "the biggest [UK] sale ever of
anything to anyone", "staggering both by its sheer size and
complexity". Hundreds of millions of pounds were reputed to have been paid
in “commissions” alone. Margaret Thatcher’s son was reported to have received
twelve million pounds himself. [2]
The UK National Audit Office investigated the deal, but
its findings were withheld. Apparently, this was “the only NAO report ever to
be withheld”. [3]
An investigation by the UK’s Serious Fraud Office was
also subsequently dropped, after political pressure from Prime Minister Tony
Blair. He was concerned to prevent embarrassment to the Saudis which might
endanger future arms sales.
The British Government was prepared to bend over
backwards and ride roughshod over its own legal processes to secure this money.
What other concessions might they have been prepared to make?
Votes
As well as finance, Islam now controls a sizeable
voting bloc in the UK, with Muslims now making up more than 3% of the
population. With most elections going to the wire these days, a 52% majority is
considered to be a landslide.
With a high degree of control exercised by the
Mosque over the lives of Muslims, this gives Islam a huge degree of leverage
over the government. Tony Blair found this out to his cost when he invaded
Iraq/Afghanistan. Whatever your thoughts on the rights or wrongs of this
particular incident, the fact remains that Britain’s foreign policy is now
being influenced by Islam.
Terror
In November 2007, MI5 announced that it was monitoring
around 2000 Islamic terror plots in the UK. Presumably there must be a few they
don’t know about. Any time the British Government makes a decision which
impacts unfavourably on Muslims, they are reminded sternly of the possible
retaliation by “extreme elements.” No Government wants to be held responsible
for aggravating such an attack.
Assassination
In Holland, Geert Wilders runs a political party which
opposes Islamic encroachment, for all the reasons I have outlined in this book.
He lives under 24/7 protection and will for the rest of his life. Few
politicians display such courage.
Meanwhile, Back in
Arabia….
Mohammed’s behaviour was beginning to have the desired
effect on other tribes nearby:
From The Sira:
I777 The Jews of Fadak
panicked when they saw what Mohammed did to Khaybar. They would be next, so
they surrendered to Mohammed without a fight. Since there was no battle
Mohammed got 100 percent of their goods, and they worked the land and gave half
to Mohammed each year. They became dhimmis like those of Khaybar.
Author’s Comments:
Islam operates through intimidation. It gains power
over people by making them afraid. Once it dominates by fear, it makes demands.
These invariably involve a society giving up the ability to defend itself, in
return for being allowed to live peacefully.
These demands are usually made
incrementally, especially at first and are framed as reasonably as possible.
Recent examples were Islamic demands that they not be profiled at airports, or
searched by dogs. This despite the fact that most threats to aircraft have come
from Islamic groups.
Having capitulated to this demand, governments are then
even more vulnerable to terror attacks on planes. This makes them more likely
to agree to the next demand, such as the silencing of free speech, further weakening
the society’s defences.
As this cycle continues, the Kaffirs become ever weaker
while Islam becomes stronger and stronger. The eventual aim, according to a
number of the more extreme Islamic groups, is the establishment of Sharia Law,
which institutionalizes the Kaffirs as second class citizens, or “dhimmis.”
No comments:
Post a Comment