By the Numbers

Raymond Ibraham explains the recent beheading in London is terms of Islam’s “Rule of Numbers”.

It reflects what I call “Islam’s Rule of Numbers,” a rule that expresses itself with remarkable consistency:  The more Muslims grow in numbers, the more Islamic phenomena intrinsic to the Muslim world—in this case, brazen violence against “infidels”—appear.

In the U.S., where Muslims are less than 1% of the population, London-style attacks are uncommon.  Islamic assertiveness is limited to political activism dedicated to portraying Islam as a “religion of peace,” and sporadic, but clandestine, acts of terror.

In Europe, where Muslims make for much larger minorities, open violence is common.  But because they are still a vulnerable minority, Islamic violence is always placed in the context of “grievances,” a word that pacifies Westerners.

With an approximate 10% Muslim population, London’s butcherers acted brazenly, yes, but they still invoked grievances.  Standing with bloodied hands, the murderer declared: “We swear by almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you until you leave us alone…. The only reason we have done this is because Muslims are dying by British soldiers every day.”

Days later in Stockholm, which also has a large Muslim minority, masked rioters  destroyed 100 cars and property.  The grievance for this particular outbreak was that police earlier shot a(nother) machete-wielding “immigrant” in self-defense.

Grievances disappear when Muslims become at least 35-40% of a nation and feel capable of waging an all-out jihad, as in Nigeria, where the Muslim-majority north has been terrorizing Christians—bombing hundreds of churches and beheading hundreds of infidels.

Sudan was an earlier paradigm, when the Khartoum government slaughtered millions to cleanse Sudan of Christians and polytheists.  Historically Christian-majority Lebanon plunged into a deadly civil war as the Muslim population grew.

Once Muslims become the majority, the violence ironically wanes, but that’s because there are fewer infidels to persecute.  And what infidels remain lead paranoid, low-key existences—as dhimmis—always careful to “know their place.”

With an 85% Muslim majority, Egypt is increasingly representative of this paradigm.  Christian Copts are under attack, but not in an all-out jihad.  Rather, under the Muslim Brotherhood their oppression is becoming institutionalized, including through new “blasphemy” laws which have seen many Christians attacked and imprisoned.

Attacks on infidels finally end when Muslims become 100% of the population, as in Saudi Arabia—where all its citizens are Muslim, and churches and other non-Islamic expressions are totally banned.

Islam is, at least in the violent, sumpremacist strain that seems to be in the ascendant, and is never very far under the surface, a thug religion. From the beginning, Muslims have counted on bullying and intimidation to keep non-Muslims from resisting or criticizing their religion. To an alarming extent this has worked in the West, thanks to lots of help from quislings in Western government and media.

The word quisling derives from the Norwegian politician Vidkun Quisling, who betrayed his country to the German invaders and served as the puppet leader under Nazi rule. Quisling has become a byword for traitor mostly because of the sound of the name which somehow sounds villainous. In fact, Quisling did not see himself as a traitor and did not intend to become a German puppet. He sincerely believed that he was doing what was best for his country and believed that Norway ought to be a free, independent ally of Germany. Hitler had other plans for Norway, however.

Our present day quislings cannot possibly believe that turning a blind eye to savage behavior and refusing to make the connection between Islam and violence best serves Western Civilization. Surely, they cannot believe that “Islamophobia” is a worse evil than beheading a British soldier in broad daylight, bombing the Boston Marathon, crashing planes into buildings or any of the more than 20,000 terrorist attacks by Muslims since 9/11. Either our present day quislings are so blinded by ideology and so ignorant of what is going on in the world that they ought not be be allowed to cross the street without an adult to guide them, or they are possessed of such a pathological hatred of their own civilization that they willingly side with barbarians.


Dividing China

English: Hu Jintao (born December 1942 ( 1942-...
He's caught on to the plan.

China’s President Hu Jintao is warning his people of the threat of division that Western counties pose to China, especially with our insidious cultural influence.

The West is using cultural means to divide China (PRCH), which needs to be alert to this threat, President Hu Jintao said in a Communist Party magazine.

“International forces are trying to Westernize and divide us by using ideology and culture,” Hu wrote in an article in Qiushi. “We need to realize this and be alert to this danger.”

Many countries, especially Western powers, are attempting to expand their influence through cultural hegemony, and China must deepen and promote its own values of “socialism with Chinese characteristics,” Hu wrote in the article, which was published on the government’s website on Jan 1. China needs to strengthen its cultural values as it faces possible challenges from the West, he said.

Dang. They are onto our plans.

I wonder what brought that on. Maybe the answer is a little further in the article.

Hu’s comments are part of a wider push by the party to reassert its influence over Chinese culture and society, including in television and the arts. China’s leaders are grappling with the best way to manage Twitter-like social-media sites such as Sina Corp (SINA).’s Weibo service that are hard for government censors to control.

The Communist Party’s Central Committee said it will supervise the world’s biggest online community more closely, promote “constructive” websites and punish the spread of “harmful information,” according to a communique from its Oct. 15-18 meeting released by the official Xinhua News Agency.

Members of the party’s Politburo visited web companies after a deadly train crash in July. Internet users criticized the government’s handling of the crash and spread commentary and photos of the accident at odds with the official line.

That explains some of it. It’s that western custom of freedom of speech and actually reporting the news that has him upset. The odd thing is that as China is starting to loosen up, however reluctantly, too many people in our government think that China might be a model to emulate.

%d bloggers like this: