Author Archives: ThomasPaine

Fun Times Ahead…Duck!

This probably captures out end better than most…it is just about gloomy enough to be real.

When you step back and look at the big picture, it really makes one wonder—how big of a piano needs to be dropped on peoples heads before they notice whats happening? Simon Black at sovereignman.com

Stars shine for billions of years, fusing one element into another, hydrogen into helium, carbon, neon, oxygen, silicon, until one day fusion into iron begins. There, quietly, at the heart of the star, its doom is sealed. Fusion into iron generates no net heat, in fact, its a heat sink. There comes those last few seconds when equilibrium is lost, the star cant support its own weight, the outer shells collapse inward at nearly the speed of light and the star is torn apart in a spectacular cataclysm. When gravity wins, it wins all at once. So it shall be with us. There are those among us who want what they dont need and need what they dont want. Tolerance for this has metamorphosized into entitlement, which for the beneficiary mimics success, and so the core of career consumers has grown large enough to make its own weather and exert its own gravity. Debt on this scale would eventually overwhelm any economy, no matter how robust. Enough is never enough, even if it were a wide-open spigot plumbed to any conceivable source of sup

via ol remus and the woodpile report.

Got Bullets? The Left Emboldened By The Marxist In Chief Exposes Themselves— Jeff Goldstein Rings The Alarm! Can You Hear It?

Jeff Goldstein is one of the guys who understands exactly where we are heading…and where we are heading will demand that all good men and women stand their ground against the tides of evil heading our way. The left is preparing the battlespace by characterizing us as worthless and evil. It occurs to me that I characterize them in much the same way…one of us is right.

The frightening truth that so many are pretending not to see is that we’ve seen this kind of scapegoating before elsewhere in the world. By design. Intended to bring about a desired end.

Here, today, the narrative from the neo-Stalinist progressives is that constitutionalists are racial supremacists and paranoid freaks; the Founding Fathers are their false idols; and the founding documents are their fetish. Religion is both their opiate and their cocaine, the thing that simultaneously dulls them into an intellectual stupor and turns them into evangelical zealots bent on demanding obeisance. Taken together, this toxic blend of hateful ignorance makes these slack-jawed clingers to their guns and their religion exceedingly dangerous to “sensible” people who want to live in a “community” wherein “common sense” laws — not the hoary edicts of dead white patriarchal slave owners — hold sway. Rational, cultured, intellectual people want to live in a land that looks forward, to progress, not backward, to a time of tri-cornered hats and oppression of the Other.

This is the propaganda war being launched against you, against me, against we, the people. Or at least, one prong of that war. Because it goes beyond the mere normalizing of a video game playing out a fantasy based (a

via As the country slides into liberal fascism, conservatives are being set up as the scapegoat | protein wisdom.

“Who Are The Police At War With?”

Indeed….

“Who Are The Police At War With?”

If these gun owners of western New York attending an information meeting in Buffalo on the NY-SAFE gun law are any indication, Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D-NY) has opened a huge can of worms that will have all sorts of unintended consequences. Who would have ever thought there would be talk of armed militias in an overwhelmingly blue state like New York?

via No Lawyers – Only Guns and Money: “Who Are The Police At War With?”.

Smacked Between The Eyes With Reality!

Rummaging through the archives of one of my favorite blogs I came across this quote. Kinda hits you right between the eyes eh?

“America is sliding deeper and deeper into a politically correct, scholastically indoctrinated, regulated, credentialed, homogenized and degenerate hole. If catastrophe does not interrupt this decline (as it surely will), then America shall become a land of subhuman semi-illiterates, utterly dependent on government, profoundly alienated from one another and entertained to the point of stupefaction.” – J. R. Nyquist  SurvivalBlog.com: Quote of the Day Archives

I am becoming less and less fascinated with the political parties as I really don’t see any solutions to our issues. The Republicans had a hand in this awful creation we call the United States. They made a career from compromising with evil and now we are broke, decadent, envious, and wicked…I no longer believe a mere election brings us back. See below…wussy is trying to grow a set.

Edit: In the shower this morning I was giving some thought to this post and I realized that it was little girl wimpy…yes wimpy. Why? Because it shows a lack of dedication on my part. Aww…little girly man doesn’t think one election will make the bo bo feel better. Aww little wussy girly man…grow a set! The left has been fighting to get us to this decadent position for the last 50 years…it has taken them that long. And now I want to change it all in ONE election? Sort of embarrassed that I don’t have the same sort of dedication as the left…nothing is ever hopeless, and the truth is you cannot lose unless you stop fighting. So excuse me while I pick up my little wussy self dust off my bottom and get back to work. Sheesh embarrassing…John Kerry has more balls than I do.

Don Quixote’s letter to the President, tilting at windmills can be fun

UPDATE: September 22, 2003 was the original publish date for this missive. I believed back then and events have done nothing to convince me otherwise that the Administration was making a grevious error by trying to justify the war in Iraq using the violations of UN sanctions as justification. I guessed and apparently got it right that keeping the American people believing in the war was crucial. We have squandered that advantage by approaching the justification for war in Iraq as a legal exercise. To me it is no coincidence that support for the war was at it’s highest when the American people believed that Saddam had a part in 9/11.

Continue reading

Secrecy and Stealth, fighting ghosts with rules and September 11, 2001

UPDATED AGAIN BECAUSE ANDREW NEEDS A LASHING: Andrew Sullivan is just about the worst offender of the don’t use torture bunch. And today he attacks Dean Barnett’s defense of mere waterboarding a technique mild enough that we demonstrate it on our very own soldiers. But effective enough that not a single hard assed terrorist was able to stand up to it for more than a couple of minutes. Naturally Andrew wants us to stop. 

UPDATE: Brought this post up from June 13 2005 because…well because this latest bit on ABC News proved me correct in declaring that torture works. Now we can well and truly laugh at the absurdity that is Senator Grandstand McCain. Sorry I have lost my respect for him after his theft of my 1st Amendment rights and his repeated Grandstands that put my family at risk. To say that Andrew Sullivan is irrelevent is redundant but finding out that torture does indeed save lives means that the next time he suggests not using torture he ante up his family as hostages to be sacrificed for his morality. Not real fond of those who feel like it is ok to sacrifice others so they can sleep well at night. But more on that below.

Updated Blackfive is talking about how we should act towards our enemy. I think this post is relevent and so will move it up to the top again. I also think this and this are relevent.

Updated again as more folks join in with relevent posts. Cadillac Tight is not impressed and though she isn’t involved directly in these discussions I don’t think Michelle Malkin is very impressed either. Thanks to Cadillac Tight for the linkage.

    “We are now in this war. We are all in it–all the way. Every single man, woman, and child is a partner in the most tremendous undertaking of our American history. We must share together the bad news and the good news, the defeats and the victories–the changing fortunes of war.” Franklin D. Roosevelt December 8, 1941       

    KILL JAPS! KILL JAPS! KILL MORE JAPS! You will help to kill the yellow bastards if you do your job well ”
    Admiral Halsey’s famous billboard at the entrance to the Tulagi Naval Base during WW2.

Burning down the house and the rules of war
Rules of war? I’m just a simple right-wing country boy, but aren’t rules supposed to be for games not war? In those two quotes above do you see any hint of rules or do you see a rational call to defeat the enemy at all costs? What has changed in our country since those times when we realized how important it was to just win the damn war?

I understand rules for football, baseball and cricket but rules for war? Who does that? Who advocates rules for war, what are their qualifications, motives and exactly whose side are they on? What does that say about a society that believes it can make rules for war? Who obeys the rules of war and what are the consequences for obeying the rules when the opponent chooses to win at any cost? What constitutes winning a war? Who fights a war they aren’t willing to win at any cost?

On one hand fighting a war with rules is exactly the combination of idiocy and luxury you would expect from our country. After all we are rich, powerful and most importantly we haven’t had anyone seriously threaten to destroy our village (country) in a very long time. Having your village to your rear while you stand athwart an enemy who desires to burn, rape and murder everything in his path probably tends to concentrate the mind regarding rules. In that position it probably might be far more important to simply win the damn battle then to invent rules intended to show that you are worth saving. A dispassionate observer might wonder if we believe that winning the war against Radical Islam is a foregone conclusion no matter how much we limit our ability to fight those intending our destruction. He might also wonder why we allow citizens whose agendas to destroy this country are clear, to set those rules, and report when they are broken.

“War is terrible”, Is a cliché for most of us in the United States at least it is for those who have not lost a loved one in a war. Our wars since the Civil War have been fought to uphold principles and to defend other groups of people, never us, from some terrible fate. All of them in the last 140 years have been fought elsewhere. Because of the insulation of our oceans we have not faced the sort of enemy who burn our crops, rape our women, murder our children and burn our villages. It follows that we haven’t as a country, felt the fear of extinction that faces those who lose wars on other continents, this is one factor that has driven us to believe that war can be fought with rules. I suspect that if one is facing an enemy across a battlefield whose intention is to rape, pillage and burn the village you are from and now stand to defend your willingness to adopt rules that might hinder your victory is very limited.

Our enemies are not playing cricket
On September 11, 2001 we were shown in the starkest terms that we have finally become the targets of those who can reach across our oceans to murder our innocents on a scale that should have shocked us out of our quaint beliefs in rules for war. On that day everything changed because finally an enemy had reached into our country murdering thousands and threatening to murder millions more. This enemy is not interested in negotiation, appeasement, or simply ignoring us, they seek our total elimination. We are the worst sort of people to these throwbacks to the Middle-Ages, we are apostates and as such only deserve death by the most horrible means. In their mind they are totally justified in murdering every single one of us, in the most brutal fashion.

    Hatred of the West and America in Particular as the Leader of the Free World The U.S.
    is seen as an infidel force that has declared total war on Islam. The first steps in its war were seen in Afghanistan and Iraq. Americans are viewed in a particularly bad light, not just as modern crusaders waging a religious war in the name of Christianity against Islam, but as an infidel people who believe in a new infidel religion – democracy – that is striving to achieve world hegemony and sees Islam as its prime enemy.

Finally the village was at our backs and a vicious uncompromising enemy driven to madness by religious zeal lay directly in front promising in loud terms to murder us and destroy our cities. This was not immediately obvious to many in the ivory tower segment of our population.

Left or Right, Ivory Towers are cozy and safe eh?
If you live in an ivory tower, supposedly oceans away from danger, then your willingness to avoid the unpleasantness of a war fought in your name may be fairly high. If you, while residing in your ivory tower, are for the war effort you may desire a huge set of burdensome rules just because you feel uncomfortable knowing that someone is brutally sticking a foot long knife to some terrorist thugs throat to gain information. You are used to rules and since you don’t have the brutal fear of staring into your enemies eyes you may seek haven from the brutality required in dispatching your enemy in rules. You may even dive into the swamp of moral equivalency pronouncing that we are becoming like the terrorists if we attempt to win by any means. In my view to accept this sort of logic forces a person to look upon the police officer who shoots the madman rampaging through the house attacking their family in the same light as the madman, since both used the same tactic to achieve their ends, killing. Surely this is mad. We are never going to become as evil as our enemy, it is a philosophical impossibility.

Both on the left and right, these groups will frame the issues of torture around the morality of their rules as if defending your life was somehow farther down the list of moral value than playing by the rules. Indeed some will even go so far as to state that they would rather die than to win the war by breaking the rules. The selfishness of such an attitude is monumental and certainly those who state such foolishness have only themselves in mind. I will state it clearly; I will live with the guilt of my shameful murder of terrorists by the vilest means if that insures the safety of my family. My guilt means nothing to me when I stare into the eyes of my children. Of course it is worth noting that I would not feel guilt in attacking my enemy in any fashion to win. I know what my enemy has planned; he has been kind enough to televise his most spectacular achievements. I am slow and stupid but I don’t need to be clubbed to understand this fight is to the death. If guilt were to be felt by me in this war it would be the guilt of watching one of my fellow citizens being beheaded and discovering that I could have stopped it had I just acted more ruthlessly.

If you are against the war you may want a set of rules because having rules gives you more tools to fight those who are waging the war. Every rule is a potential violation to be used against those who find themselves all alone defending people unworthy of defense from an enemy the anti war folks have never imagined possible. That there are many people amongst the Anti War crowd with valid questions about the war does not forgive the fact that also amongst that crowd stand people who do not wish this country well. They travel along the same roads of the Islamofacists and those who honestly disagree with the war but love this country owe it to their movement to name these groups and not accept their help.

E’ tu Brutus or how long is a 5th column?
We would be severely remiss if we were to believe that our enemy was so primitive as to not realize that an opening existed to insert rules that would hinder the exploitation of his troops after they are captured. Naturally the Islamofacist leaders will not stand up and argue their case themselves, they will instead support those many groups that have existed in this country who wish it ill. No doubt only a minority of these groups would agree with all of the goals of the Islamofacists but certainly the affects of all of those groups’ efforts whether they agree or not with the goals of the Islamofacists would be advantageous to the war effort of the Islamofacists.

Our country has had its internal enemies quite apart from the Islamofacists, for sometime and it matters little to those groups who brings this country down as long as this country is ultimately humbled. Indeed part of our enemy’s efforts surely must be to exploit this seam in our defenses as this 5th column is embedded in our society in ways that would take the Islamofacists decades to duplicate. Many of these groups have splinter groups that act as the political mouthpiece of those groups too radical to be considered openly. We must realize that our nation is a target of a great many truly bad people.

Since so much of our enemies efforts rely on secrecy and stealth, insuring that his plans are not exposed by the capture and interrogation of key individuals would be very high up on his list of things to do. Hindering our efforts at gaining information from his soldiers once they are captured is paramount and conversely it is paramount that we gain information from those we capture. That we are willing to give our enemies the advantage of our following rules he doesn’t acknowledge must seem like manna from heaven to his war effort.

Torture doesn’t work and other fables of those in the Ivory Towers
About this point Glenn Reynolds, whose keyboard is so often so much mightier than a sword, will be claiming that he doesn’t believe in torture because it doesn’t work. This, without even the slightest attempt at goggling torture, will seem naive to those who have faced force on a regular basis. Naturally those who understand the use of force and how it affects those threatened by it will laugh at the naiveté of believing torture doesn’t work. If it didn’t work it wouldn’t be used. We can put aside for a moment that oft time’s torture is used as a useful education to those who are not the recipients, of what happens when you cross those who are in power.

The plain fact is that torture does indeed work. In fact it works against the very enemy we are fighting. “In 1995, the police in the Philippines tortured Abdul Hakim Murad after finding a bomb-making factory in his apartment in Manila. They broke his ribs, burned him with cigarettes, forced water down his throat, then threatened to turn him over to the Israelis. Finally, from this withered and broken man came secrets of a terror plot to blow up 11 airliners, crash another into the headquarters of the CIA and to assassinate the Pope. ”

This bit of violent torture is how we also ended up gaining information that led to the capture of Ramseh Yousef the bomb maker who attempted to blow up the WTC in 1993. He was using this apartment to construct his ingenious altitude detonated miniature bomb he intended to use in his attempt to blow up 12 US Airliners in a plot called the Bojinka or big bang. Torture doesn’t work?

If we aren’t careful our enemies will start being very mean
“Our enemies unburdened because of our use of torture will begin using terrible tactics themselves” Those who actually believe our enemies will all of a sudden start using torture against our soldiers should we be so bold as to break our own rules are in hopeless denial of the enemy we face. How can anyone watch the beheading of Nicholas Berg, with his horrible screams for mercy, then run straight to believing that our enemy is restrained by anything on the battlefield? It is worth remembering that our enemy is given sanction by his interpretation of his religion to murder us wholesale by any means up to and including the most harsh and painful. Some might say he is even encouraged to find the most painful ways. Furthermore it would be easy to spend some time showing that our willingness to avoid using certain tactics only encourages the use of those same tactics by our enemies. Here is but one example of the efficiency of proving that ones willingness to use the worst sorts of tactics avoids the use against you of those tactics.

In Lebanon Sept. 30 – Four Soviet diplomats kidnapped in Lebanon, 1 killed but other three released unharmed after a relative of the terrorist leader’s was kidnapped and killed by the Soviet KGB. Left unsaid in this article is that the Soviets cut the man’s balls off stuffed them in his mouth and then dropped him off in front of the headquarters. The Soviets never suffered another incident.

Harsh? Absolutely, but harsher than 4 aircraft being hijacked and run into buildings murdering thousands? We aren’t playing cricket here. And don’t lets not try and say that its easy for civilians to be tough because y’all aren’t facing the bad guys. Five characters answer that charge, Flt93. No doubt that our military is brave and competent beyond all of our greatest hopes and because of that perhaps they shouldn’t be asked to conduct the sort of sessions with the enemy that might bring us the information we need to break up our enemies plans.

What sort of enemy do we face now?
“We are now in this war. We are all in it–all the way. Every single man, woman, and child is a partner in the most tremendous undertaking of our American history. We must share together the bad news and the good news, the defeats and the victories–the changing fortunes of war.” Franklin D. Roosevelt December 8, 1941

At the time of that statement neither the Germans or the Japanese had invasion plans for the United States. Agents of the Axis did not have as their goal the murder of every single mother, child and father in these United States. Do I mean in minimize the horror of the Germans and Japanese, absolutely not, I intend to emphasize the magnitude of our fight now. It is worth noting that those who do battle with us now do actually intend to try and murder us all. Many of us deal with this fact in many different ineffectual ways. We ignore it, we forget it, we play like we misunderstand their goals, we blame our government, we blame each other, we blame every single person except those who are actually intent on such mass murder.

Its almost as if we are afraid of offending their delicate feelings between bouts of mass murder and beheadings. Sometimes we even believe that they are incompetent and cannot achieve their goals. You might want to take a quick look at the score card of the last 1400 years before getting cocky. You might also want to consider that so far they have managed quite a lot with so very little. Remember this one point, how many enemies have been able to attack our central headquarters of our military and the seat of our government. How wise is it to underestimate the folks who have already accomplished both of those goals?

To our backs lie our children and our elderly, all of our riches, our homes and our lives, to our fronts lies an enemy driven to madness by a religion gone corrupt. Exactly which rules are you willing to abide by in your effort to win and prevent our destruction?

To be continued…

Michelle Malkin: ONCE MORE, INTO THE TOILET
Belmont Club has more…
Instapundit with more…
Check out this Bill Whittle Post over at Eject Eject Eject.

Eurabia, Censorship in England, Moderate Islam the Mirage in the Desert

Moderate Islam in action in Great Britain. Notice that this article is not available anymore due to legal reasons,see here I have copied the entire article to give you some idea of exactly what is now considered illegal in Great Britain. Hat tip Little Green FootballsPeople try and declare that Oriana Fallaci is radical for being so outspoken against Islam. My answer to them is she predicted this sort of behavior they did not.

So then I suspect that I would be labeled a bigot if I point out that this article is disturbing? Or would I be labeled a bigot if I pointed out that Great Britain censoring articles like this shows that they have decided to accept dhimmitude meekly rather than to fight for rights they themselves gave to the rest of the world. Or perhaps I would be labeled Islamophobic if I were to point out that it is disquieting indeed to see Great Britain lay down with nary a fight. Is this the way we shall go?

Perhaps it is time to be proud of being labeled all those sorts of names if it means not laying down to the sort of giving up of rights we see in the rest of the world. I stand with the Queen of Denmark. She said:

“We are being challenged by Islam these years. Globally as well as locally. There is something impressive about people for whom religion imbues their existence, from dusk to dawn, from cradle to grave. There are also Christians who feel this way.

“There is something endearing about people who give themselves up completely to their faith. But there is likewise something frightening about such a totality, which also is a feature of Islam.

“A counterbalance has to be found, and one has to, at times, run the risk of having unflattering labels placed on you. For there are some things for which one should display no tolerance. And when we are tolerant, we must know whether it is because of convenience or conviction.”

VirtueOnline-News – News – ENGLAND: The day is coming when British Muslims form a state within a state: ENGLAND: The day is coming when British Muslims form a state within a state

By Alasdair Palmer
The Telegraph Group
February 19, 2006

For the past two weeks, Patrick Sookhdeo has been canvassing the opinions of Muslim clerics in Britain on the row over the cartoons featuring images of Mohammed that were first published in Denmark and then reprinted in several other European countries.

“They think they have won the debate,” he says with a sigh. “They believe that the British Government has capitulated to them, because it feared the consequences if it did not.

“The cartoons, you see, have not been published in this country, and the Government has been very critical of those countries in which they were published. To many of the Islamic clerics, that’s a clear victory.

“It’s confirmation of what they believe to be a familiar pattern: if spokesmen for British Muslims threaten what they call ‘adverse consequences’ – violence to the rest of us – then the British Government will cave in. I think it is a very dangerous precedent.”

Dr Sookhdeo adds that he believes that “in a decade, you will see parts of English cities which are controlled by Muslim clerics and which follow, not the common law, but aspects of Muslim sharia law.

“It is already starting to happen – and unless the Government changes the way it treats the so-called leaders of the Islamic community, it will continue.”

For someone with such strong and uncompromising views, Dr Sookhdeo is a surprisingly gentle and easy-going man. He speaks with authority on Islam, as it was his first faith: he was brought up as a Muslim in Guyana, the only English colony in South America, and attended a madrassa there.

“But Islamic instruction was very different in the 1950s, when I was at school,” he says. “There was no talk of suicide bombing or indeed of violence of any kind. Islam was very peaceful.”

Dr Sookhdeo’s family emigrated to England when he was 10. In his early twenties, when he was at university, he converted to Christianity. “I had simply seen it as the white man’s religion, the religion of the colonialists and the oppressors – in a very similar way, in fact, to the way that many Muslims see Christianity today.

” Leaving Islam was not easy. According to the literal interpretation of the Koran, the punishment for apostasy is death – and it actually is punished by death in some Middle Eastern states. “It wasn’t quite like that here,” he says, “although it was traumatic in some ways.”

Dr Sookhdeo continued to study Islam, doing a PhD at London University on the religion. He is currently director of the Institute for the Study of Islam and Christianity. He also advises the Army on security issues related to Islam.

Several years ago, Dr Sookhdeo insisted that the next wave of radical Islam in Britain would involve suicide bombings in this country. His prediction was depressingly confirmed on 7/7 last year.

So his claim that, in the next decade, the Muslim community in Britain will not be integrated into mainstream British society, but will isolate itself to a much greater extent, carries weight behind it. Dr Sookhdeo has proved his prescience.

“The Government, and Tony Blair, the Prime Minister, are fundamentally deluded about the nature of Islam,” he insists. “Tony Blair unintentionally revealed his ignorance when he said, in an effort to conciliate Muslims, that he had ‘read through the Koran twice’ and that he kept it by his bedside.

“He thought he was saying something which showed how seriously he took Islam. But most Muslims thought it was a joke, if not an insult. Because, of course, every Muslim knows that you cannot read the Koran through from cover to cover and understand it.

The chapters are not written to be read in that way. Indeed, after the first chapter, the chapters of the Koran are ordered according to their length, not according to their content or chronology: the longest chapters are first, the shorter ones are at the end.

“You need to know which passage was revealed at what period and in what time in order to be able to understand it – you cannot simply read it from beginning to end and expect to learn anything at all.

“That is one reason why it takes so long to be able to read and understand the Koran: the meaning of any part of it depends on a knowledge of its context – a context that is not in the Koran itself.”

The Prime Minister’s ignorance of Islam, Dr Sookhdeo contends, is of a piece with his unsuccessful attempts to conciliate it. And it does indeed seem as if the Government’s policy towards radical Islam is based on the hope that if it makes concessions to its leaders, they will reciprocate and relations between fundamentalist Muslims and Tony Blair’s Government will then turn into something resembling an ecumenical prayer meeting.

Dr Sookhdeo nods in vigorous agreement with that. “Yes – and it is a very big mistake. Look at what happened in the 1990s. The security services knew about Abu Hamza and the preachers like him. They knew that London was becoming the centre for Islamic terrorists. The police knew. The Government knew. Yet nothing was done.

“The whole approach towards Muslim militants was based on appeasement. 7/7 proved that that approach does not work – yet it is still being followed. For example, there is a book, The Noble Koran: a New Rendering of its Meaning in English, which is openly available in Muslim bookshops.

“It calls for the killing of Jews and Christians, and it sets out a strategy for killing the infidels and for warfare against them. The Government has done nothing whatever to interfere with the sale of that book.

“Why not? Government ministers have promised to punish religious hatred, to criminalise the glorification of terrorism, yet they do nothing about this book, which blatantly does both.”

Perhaps the explanation is just that they do not take it seriously. “I fear that is exactly the problem,” says Dr Sookhdeo. “The trouble is that Tony Blair and other ministers see Islam through the prism of their own secular outlook.

They simply do not realise how seriously Muslims take their religion. Islamic clerics regard themselves as locked in mortal combat with secularism.

“For example, one of the fundamental notions of a secular society is the moral importance of freedom, of individual choice. But in Islam, choice is not allowable: there cannot be free choice about whether to choose or reject any of the fundamental aspects of the religion, because they are all divinely ordained. God has laid down the law, and man must obey.

‘Islamic clerics do not believe in a society in which Islam is one religion among others in a society ruled by basically non-religious laws. They believe it must be the dominant religion – and it is their aim to achieve this.

“That is why they do not believe in integration. In 1980, the Islamic Council of Europe laid out their strategy for the future – and the fundamental rule was never dilute your presence. That is to say, do not integrate.

“Rather, concentrate Muslim presence in a particular area until you are a majority in that area, so that the institutions of the local community come to reflect Islamic structures. The education system will be Islamic, the shops will serve only halal food, there will be no advertisements showing naked or semi-naked women, and so on.”

That plan, says Dr Sookhdeo, is being followed in Britain. “That is why you are seeing areas which are now almost totally Muslim. The next step will be pushing the Government to recognise sharia law for Muslim communities – which will be backed up by the claim that it is “racist” or “Islamophobic” or “violating the rights of Muslims” to deny them sharia law.

“There’s already a Sharia Law Council for the UK. The Government has already started making concessions: it has changed the law so that there are sharia-compliant mortgages and sharia pensions.

“Some Muslims are now pressing to be allowed four wives: they say it is part of their religion. They claim that not being allowed four wives is a denial of their religious liberty. There are Muslim men in Britain who marry and divorce three women, then marry a fourth time – and stay married, in sharia law, to all four.

“The more fundamentalist clerics think that it is only a matter of time before they will persuade the Government to concede on the issue of sharia law. Given the Government’s record of capitulating, you can see why they believe that.”

Dr Sookhdeo’s vision of a relentless battle between secular and Islamic Britain seems hard to reconcile with the co-operation that seems to mark the vast majority of the interactions between the two communities.

“Well, it isn’t me who says Islam is at war with secularisation,” he says. “That’s how Islamic clerics describe the situation.”

But isn’t it true that most Muslims who live in theocratic states want to get out of them as quickly as possible and live in a secular country such as Britain or America? And that most Muslims who come to Britain adopt the values of a liberal, democratic, tolerant society, rather than insisting on the inflexible rules of their religion?

“You have to distinguish between ordinary Muslims and their self-appointed leaders,” explains Dr Sookhdeo. “I agree that the best hope for our collective future is that the majority of Muslims who have grown up here have accepted the secular nature of the British state and society, the division between religion and politics, and the importance of allowing people to choose freely how they will live.

“But that is not how most of the clerics talk. And, more significantly, it is not how the ‘community leaders’ whom the Government has decided represent the Muslim community think either.

“Take, for example, Tariq Ramadan, whom the Government has appointed as an adviser because ministers think he is a ‘community leader’. Ramadan sounds, in public, very moderate. But in reality, he has some very extreme views. He attacks liberal Muslims as ‘Muslims without Islam’. He is affiliated to the violent and uncompromising Muslim Brotherhood.

“He calls the education in the state schools of the West ‘aggression against the Islamic personality of the child’. He has said that ‘the Muslim respects the laws of the country only if they do not contradict any Islamic principle’. He has added that ‘compromising on principles is a sign of fear and weakness’.”

So what’s the answer? What should the Government be doing? “First, it should try to engage with the real Muslim majority, not with the self-appointed ‘community leaders’ who don’t actually represent anyone: they have not been elected, and the vast majority of ordinary Muslims have nothing to do with them.

“Second, the Government should say no to faith-based schools, because they are a block to integration. There should be no compromise over education, or over English as the language of education. The policy of political multiculturalism should be reversed.

“The hope was that it would to ensure separate communities would soften at the edges and integrate. But the opposite has in fact happened: Islamic communities have hardened. There is much less integration than there was for the generation that arrived when I did. There will be much less in the future if the present trend continues.

“Finally, the Government should make it absolutely clear: we welcome diversity, we welcome different religions – but all of them have to accept the secular basis of British law and society. That is a non-negotiable condition of being here.

“If the Government does not do all of those things then I fear for the future, because Islamic communities within Britain will form a state within a state. Religion will occupy an ever-larger place in our collective political life. And, speaking as a religious man myself, I fear that outcome.”

http://www.opinion.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/02/19/nsharia219.xml Copyright of Telegraph Group Limited 2006.