|
Here's the latest from the noted European essayist Fjordman:
Hugh Fitzgerald of Jihad Watch recently suggested a number of things Europeans can do to halt Islamization. The proposals were good, but I think we should focus on the most important obstacle: the European Union. I've suggested in the past that the EU is the principal motor behind the Islamization of Europe, and that the entire organization needs to be dismantled as soon as possible, otherwise nothing substantial can ever be done about the Muslim invasion. At the Gates of Vienna blog, I am writing a text called "Ten Reasons to Get Rid of the European Union," which can be translated into other languages and be republished when it is completed.As Bat Ye'or demonstrates in her book Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis, senior EU leaders have actively been working for years to merge Europe with the Arab world. They are now feeling confident enough to say this openly. The British Foreign Minister David Miliband in November 2007 stated that the European Union should work towards including Middle Eastern and North African countries, as this would "extend stability." He also said that the EU must "keep our promises to Turkey" regarding EU membership.
The EU involves the free movement of people across borders. If it expands to the Middle East, hundreds of millions of Muslims will have free access to Germany, Italy, France, Britain, Sweden, the Czech Republic and Austria. If Turkey becomes a member, it means that Greeks, Bulgarians and others who have fought against oppression by Ottoman Turks for centuries will now be flooded with Muslims from a rapidly re-Islamizing Turkey. The same goes for Poles, Hungarians, Romanians and others who fought against Muslims for centuries.
The EU's Justice and Security Commissioner Franco Frattini states that Europe must relax its immigration controls and open the door to an extra 20 million "Africans and Asians" during the next two decades. Most of these "Africans and Asians" come from the predominantly Muslim countries of North Africa and the Greater Middle East. The EU thus decided to flood Europe with tens of millions of Muslims at the same time as peaceful Europeans demonstrating against the Islamization of Europe were brutally harassed by the police in the EU capital of Brussels. Frattini has also banned the use of the phrase Islamic terrorism: "People who commit suicide attacks or criminal activities on behalf of religion, Islamic religion or other religion, they abuse the name of this religion." He thinks we shouldn't use the word "immigration," either, we should talk about "mobility."
While Dutch politicians, in what was until recently a peaceful country, have been killed for being too critical of Islam, while Islamic terror attacks have murdered people in London and Madrid, while more terror attacks are planned every single day from Italy via Paris to Denmark, and while people from Sweden to Germany are subject to Muslim street violence and harassment, EU leaders want to increase Europe's Muslim population by tens of millions in a few years. This is criminal and evil, pure and simple.
In Cologne, Germany, a Muslim teenager who wanted to mug a 20-year-old German man was killed in an act of self-defense, according to witnesses. This led to angry protests from Muslims. Apparently, non-Muslims are not supposed to defend themselves from attacks. This violence is usually labelled "crime," but I believe it should more accurately be called Jihad.
Those who know Islamic history, as described in books such as The Truth About Muhammad by Robert Spencer or The Legacy of Jihad by Dr. Andrew G. Bostom, know that looting and stealing the property of non-Muslims has been part and parcel of Jihad from the very beginning. In fact, so much of the behavior of Muhammad and early Muslims could be deemed criminal that it is difficult to know where crime ends and Jihad begins. In the city of Oslo, it is documented that some of the criminal gangs also have close ties to Jihadist groups at home and abroad. As Dutch Arabist Hans Jansen points out, the Koran is seen by some Muslims as a God-given "hunting licence," granting them the right to assault and even murder non-Muslims. It is hardly accidental that while Muslims make up a minority of the population in France, they make up an estimated seventy percent of French prison inmates.
Why would anybody in their right mind want to import Islam, the most destructive force on the planet? Are EU leaders naïve? I don't think so, at least not all of them. You cannot maintain political power in the long run if you are totally naive.We are told to treat cultural and historical identities as fashion accessories, shirts we can wear and change at will. The Multicultural society is "colorful," an adjective normally attached to furniture or curtains. Cultures are window decorations of little or no consequence, and one might as well have one as the other. In fact, it is good to change it every now and then. Don't you get tired of that old sofa sometimes? What about exchanging it for the new sharia model? Sure, it's slightly less comfortable than the old one, but it's very much in vogue these days and sets you apart from the neighbors, at least until they get one, too. Do you want a sample of the latest Calvin Klein perfume to go with that sharia?
I have heard individuals state point blank that even if Muslims become the majority in our countries in the future, this doesn't matter because all people are equal and all cultures are just a mix of everything else, anyway. And since religions are just fairy-tales, replacing one fairy-tale with another one won't make a big difference. All religions basically say that the same things in different ways. However, not one of them would ever dream of saying that all political ideologies "basically mean the same thing." They simply don't view religious or cultural ideas as significant, and thus won't spend time on studying the largely unimportant details of each specific creed.
In The Suicide of Reason: Radical Islam's Threat to the West, Lee Harris writes that: "What strikes us as irrationalities in the economic systems of Third World nations, such as the red tape documented by [Peruvian economist Hernando] de Soto, is not irrational at all from the point of view of the dominant elite: It is part of what keeps them dominant. With enough red tape, they can stay king of the mountain forever."
This reminds me a great deal of what the EU is doing, attempting to create a permanent oligarchy by keeping the native population in line though a combination of confusion, bureaucracy and intimidation from imported Muslims.
Far from being an irrelevant detail, religion is the heart and blood of any civilization. The greatest change (until now) in my country's history was when we adopted Christianity instead of the Norse religion. This changed the entire fabric of our culture. We became integrated into the mainstream of Western civilization at about the same time as we went from being a tribal society to a genuine state. Maybe Christianity helped in creating the foundations of nation states with an individualistic culture. If so, perhaps changing the religion is beneficial for those who want to replace nation states with authoritarian transnational entities, for instance the European Union. Islamic societies are always authoritarian. Those who want to abolish the democratic system and rule as an unaccountable oligarchy thus naturally prefer Islam.
The EU is an awful organization even if you don't take Muslim immigration into account. Former Soviet dissident Vladimir Bukovksy, who is not particularly preoccupied with Islam, fears that the European Union is on its way to becoming another Soviet Union: "The sooner we finish with the EU the better. The sooner it collapses the less damage it will have done to us and to other countries."
The brilliant French political thinker Montesquieu advocated that the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government should be assigned to different bodies, each of them not powerful enough alone to impose its will on society. This is because "constant experience shows us that every man invested with power is apt to abuse it, and to carry his authority as far as it will go." This separation of powers is almost totally absent in the EU, where there is weak to non-existent separation between the legislative, the executive and the judicial branches, and where all of them function more or less without the consent of the public.
As Montesquieu warned, "When the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person, or in the same body of magistrates, there can be no liberty; because apprehensions may arise, lest the same monarch or senate should enact tyrannical laws, to execute them in a tyrannical manner." He also stated that "Useless laws weaken the necessary laws." The problem with the EU is not just the content of laws, but their volume. Law-abiding citizens are turned into criminals by laws regulating speech and behavior, while real criminals rule the streets. This will either lead to a police state, to a total breakdown in law and order, or both.
At least two conditions must be fulfilled in order to prevent the arbitrary use of power. The first one is a system of formal checks and balances, giving the possibility of peacefully removing officials who are not doing their job. The second is transparency, so people know what their representatives are doing. The EU deliberately ignores both these conditions, but especially the latter. Vast quantities of power have been transferred to shady backrooms and structures the average citizen hardly knows exist. Eurabia was created through such channels.
The pompous former French president Valéry Giscard d'Estaing declared that the creation of the proposed EU Constitution was Europe's "Philadelphia moment," alluding to the Philadelphia Convention or Constitutional Convention in the newly formed the United States of America in 1787. The USA has its flaws, but if Mr. Giscard d'Estaing had actually understood the American Constitution, he would have discovered that James Madison, Thomas Jefferson and others took great care to implement a number of checks and balances in the new state, precisely what is lacking in the EU. The American constitution is relatively short and understandable, whereas the EU Constitution is hundreds of pages long, largely incomprehensible and displays an almost sharia-like desire to regulate all aspects of human life. After it was rejected by Dutch and French voters, the Constitution has been renamed and is now being smuggled through the back door.
Madison, Jefferson, George Washington and the American Founding Fathers acted in the open and were generally elected by their peers and applauded for their actions. Contrast this with Jean Monnet, who is credited with having laid the foundations of the EU, despite the fact that most EU citizens haven't heard of him. He was never elected to any public office, but worked behind the scenes to implement a secret agenda. I read an interview with a senior Brussels lobbyist who dubbed Monnet "the most successful lobbyist in history." To this day, the EU capital of Brussels is dominated by lobbyists. The Americans in Washington D.C. have their fair share of lobbyists, too, and this can be problematic at times. The difference is that the EU capital is dominated ONLY by lobbyists and unelected bureaucrats, with little real popular influence. Those who read the excellent British blog EU Referendum regularly will know that this secretive modus operandi is still very much alive in the European Union.
Frankly, I don't think the EU has the right to use the term "European." Those inhabiting the European continent are first and foremost Germans, Dutchmen, Poles, Italians, Hungarians, Portuguese etc. "Europe" has existed mainly to protect the continent against Islamic expansionism. Charles Martel created Europe when he defeated the Arab invasion in the seventh century, aided by people such as Pelayo, who started the Reconquista in the Iberian Peninsula, John Hunyadi and Lazar of Serbia who fought against the Turks in the Balkans and John III Sobieski, King of Poland, who beat the Ottomans during the 1683 Battle of Vienna. The EU is actively trying to undo everything Charles Martel and these men achieved. This makes it the anti-European Union, an evil organization with no moral legitimacy whatsoever.
The EU is gradually reducing the indigenous people of an entire continent to the likely future status of second-rate citizen in their own countries. It is quite possibly the greatest betrayal in the history of European civilization since the fall of the Roman Empire, yet it is hailed as a "peace project" in the media. It is shameful to witness the bullying displayed by EU leaders vis-à-vis the Serbs, who are being forced to give up their land to Muslim thugs. This template will eventually be used against all Europeans. As Srdja Trifkovic warns, even if the Serbs are robbed of Kosovo, Muslims will not thank the West:
"In Europe most nations want to defend themselves—even the ultra-tolerant Dutch have seen the light after Theo van Gogh's murder—but cannot do so because they are hamstrung by a ruling class composed of guilt-ridden self-haters and appeasers. Their hold on the political power, the media, and the academe is undemocratic, unnatural, obscene. If Europe is to survive they need to be unmasked for what they are: traitors to their nations and their culture. If Europe is to survive, they must be replaced by people ready and willing to subject the issues of immigration and identity to the test of democracy, unhindered by administrative or judicial fiat. For those reasons too, Serbia must not give up Kosovo. By giving it up it would encourage the spirit that seeks the death of Europe and its surrender to the global totalitarianism of Muhammad's successors. Not for the first time, in Kosovo the Serbs are fighting a fight that is not theirs alone."
Some hope we can keep the "positive" aspects of the EU and not "throw out the baby with the bath water." I beg to differ. The EU is all bath water, no baby. The EU got off on the wrong path from its very inception, and is now so flawed that it simply cannot be reformed. Appeasement of Islam is so deeply immersed in the structural DNA of the EU that the only way to stop the Islamization of Europe is to dismantle the European Union. All of it.
Posted by Robert at February 9, 2008 7:03 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
Oh please tell me what Hugh Fitzgerald suggested so that Europeans can halt Islamization ... the link doesnt work! And BTW Bergen-Belsen has been tried.
Why is it the responsibility of Europe, and ultimately the rest of the free world, to "open the door" to millions of muslims? Who made them our problem? The sooner the EU collapses, the better, but what will it take? Armed uprisings by the citizens of Germany, Britain, France and all the other European countries?
It isn't difficult to believe there really is a world-wide conspiracy to bring about "a new world order". The question is, who is behind it and what can be done about it?
Posted by: ImNoDhimmi at February 9, 2008 8:09 AM"Why is it the responsibility of Europe, and ultimately the rest of the free world, to "open the door" to millions of muslims? "
Because the architect of The United States of Europe, Napoleon, demanded it so.
"I hope that in the near future I will have the chance to gather together the wise and cultured people of the world and establish a government that I will operate [in accordance with the principles written in Qur'an al-karim.]" (Koran)"
Napoleon.
Napoleon, communism, Islam and the EU are intricately linked.
Islam unites the people, the EU wants to be United, communism has failed. The Archbishop tests the water with calls for Sharia.
Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at February 9, 2008 8:17 AMThX Robert, ( though I am sure 'cordial' = 'wack behind the head ')
But nethertheless , a policy of discriminating a against Muslims , as Mr Fitagerald commends will NOT occur unless the State becomes totalitarian ( due to all those pesky liberals) ... so my comment stands- it is the consumption of Western civilisation or a reaction to save it that will be brutal and "Balkan " in its obscenity ( and necessity).
Posted by: David Xavier at February 9, 2008 9:41 AMIslam unites the people, the EU wants to be United, communism has failed.
posted by leonthepigfarmer
It really boggles my mind(ok, no mean feat) that someone would be willing to deny who they are for something so abstract as "unity." I am a Texan. I do not live in Texas, I am currently temporarily residing in Kansas, but I am most definitely Texan. Please, no Toto or tornado jokes, heard them all in the 8 years. Being a Texan has shaped who I am as a person. Fiercely independent. I can not conceivably see myself willfully denying who I am in this regard. I am also an American. As in the United States of American, not North America, South America, or Central America. So it completely perplexes me as to why many of the citizens of the nations on the continent of Europe would want to forgo their identity and therefore vast culture for some abortion known as the EU. If I were to quit being a Texan and an American, then I am no longer me. Yes, I am aware of some of the many reasons given for the EU, but it still doesn't make sense.
Posted by: Kevin at February 9, 2008 11:44 AMPlease stop with that fake quote about napoleon and islam. That's a myth created by the muslim propagandists.
Posted by: Fedorenko at February 9, 2008 2:25 PMFedorenko
Please provide information and links please. I'm interested to see if Louis Fauvelet was an islamist propagandist?
He wrote Napoleon's memoirs and was the one who published the Napoleon Koran quote in 1889.
You claimed that "Please stop with that fake quote about napoleon and islam. That's a myth created by the muslim propagandists."
Your job is to now back up your post.
Memoirs of Napoleon Bonaparte by Louis Antoine Fauvelet de Bourrienne edited by R.W. Phipps. Vol. 1 (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1889)
Thanks
Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at February 9, 2008 5:32 PMFedorenko
I think that you are mistaken and what you are confusing is Napoleon's respect and admiration for a government based on the Koranic ideology as Napoleon's conversion to Islam. No, Napoleon was never a Muslim convert as professed by many Islamic web sites and blogs but Napoleon was a great believer in the unity of the Koran and Islam and how this ideology would gel together the United States of Europe.
Napoléon Bonaparte as quoted in Christian Cherfils, ‘Bonaparte et Islam,’ Pedone Ed., Paris, France, 1914, pp. 105, 125.
The EU is the most dangerous thing to happen to Europe since the Nazis. It is the most corrupt institution on the planet. I can relate to what has been said here about it being the vehicle for islamization. It is. In the UK we are about to lose our right to govern ourselves. Our self appointed leader Gordon Brown is ignoring the wishes of the British people by using disingenuous arguments to refuse us a referendum. He knows that we will vote the treaty out and so will not allow us a voice. This is the very antithesis of democracy.
Our own self appointed prime minister is ignoring the majority of the country. And that makes him a dictator. I am learning to hate this socialist nightmare that you have foisted on us. But I won't run. I won't be quiet. I will fight you every step of the way. You can have my democracy when you prise it out of my cold dead hands.
Posted by: DaveMate at February 9, 2008 8:59 PMThose who think that there is even a possibility of an armed uprising in Europe against the EU and against a Muslim takeover of Europe have forgotten that the governments of Europe have for the most part disarmed their citizens so that they can not fight back. If I remember correctly, the citizens of Brussels can not even legally carry pepper spray or mace to defend themselves.
What I fear may be the precursor to a union between Canada, the US, and Mexico will be a similar disarmament of the US citizen. The US Supreme Court review coming up in June of gun control laws in Washington DC in which the city is arguing that the constitution guarantees a collective, not an individual right to keep and bear arms could be the beginning of the end for our freedoms. If the Supreme Court was willing to sell out the private property rights of working-class people to the interests of developers and parasitic municipal politicians in the Kelo decision (5th Amendment issue), then why not emasculate the 2nd Amendment as well?
"What evil lurks in the hearts of men? The Shadow Know!"
Posted by: TheShadow at February 10, 2008 3:04 AMThe problem is far worse, and at a far more advanced stage, than you think...
The EU deiberately ignores citizens. It believes it can deal with "the problem" of religions through secularization and legislation preventing "discrimination" and "intolerance". But it is far worse than this...
The EU and the UN are working together on policy instruments to "reduce conflict" - and they have decided that a major part of the problem is "divisive language" in society especially against religions.
In the future, there WILL BE LEGAL intervenion from both the EU (on its citizens) and pressure on non-EU states (like USA, Canada, Australia) through the United Nations. Therefore, there is a global trend towards a standardizing policy; policy which will PREVENT even peaceful, well-meaning dissent and counter-argument.
JihadWatch, DhimmiWatch and many other sites may soon become targets for EU-UN legislation to reduce "religious hatred" since they will be deemed to be "sources of social division".
If you're interested in this - and you are out of your mind if you are not - watch the following EU and UN linked agencies:
1) The Alliance of Civiizations
2) The European Neighbourhood Policy
3) The Centre for Inquiry
4) The Council for Secular Humanism
5) The Committee fo the Scientific Examination of Religion
We are being identified now. We will be hunted down vey soon. Prepare.
Posted by: Stefcho at February 10, 2008 4:40 AMYes, Fjordman, the EU is destroying europe. Yes, Islam is bad. Yes, europeans should voice their contempt for that. But... should we change one fascism (eurabians+muslims) with another (neo-nazism)?
I usually like the things you write, but seeing the bed fellows you have, Fjordman, everything you say gets tainted by it.
The anti-jihad movement doesn't need neo-nazis on our side. Truth doesn't need falsehood, as it is written "No lie is of the truth" (1 John 2:21).
Posted by: Crusader at February 10, 2008 8:14 AMIt's sad what's happening with once proud europe. As the Christian faith decreases in europe, other "religious" worldviews increase (atheism, islamic, comunism, liberalism, eurabianism, etc).
As Fjordman says, we are being humstrung by the law. Amazing. Europeans, and other non-europeans who promote europeans values, are to be identified as "criminals" for not wanting to live under filthy shariah.
This is, in deed, the greatest betrayal in human history.
Posted by: Crusader at February 10, 2008 8:25 AMleonthepigfarmer:
"Napoleon was a great believer in the unity of the Koran and Islam and how this ideology would gel together the United States of Europe.".
How many times do we have to see this same conspiracist crap posted in the comments at Jihadwatch, by posters who have just lazily copied it from other idiots' websites?
Napoloeon was not "a great believer in the unity of the Koran..." etc. This is a falsehood propagated by Christian Chervils’ Bonaparte et L’Islam, a 1914 work so obscure and so irrelevant to the serious study of Bonaparte’s life that you’ll be hard-pressed to find a copy anywhere. (I did hear a while back of a new edition, an English translation, being planned by a British convert to Islam, but nothing more.)
“I hope the time is not far off when I shall be able to unite all the wise and educated men of all the countries and establish a uniform regime based on the principles of Qur'an which alone are true and which alone can lead men to happiness.”
That quote comes from Cherfils’ book and that book alone. It is not quoted in any of the other numerous volumes on Napoleon’s life, nor does it appear in the other work quoted in the above post, Louis Antoine Fauvelet de Bourrienne’s Memoirs of Bonaparte.
De Bourienne’s Memoirs is itself considered an untrustworthy source by historians - he greatly overplays his relationship with the dictator - but it does at least clear up the “great believer in Islam” myth spread by Islamist propagandists and swallowed up by the more gullible non-Muslim minds. Of Napoleon’s references to Islam while in Egypt, De Bourienne wrote:
"Doubtless Bonaparte did, as he was bound to do, show respect for the religion of the country; and he found it necessary to act more like a Mussulman than a Catholic. A wise conqueror supports his triumphs by protecting and even elevating the religion of the conquered people.
Bonaparte's principle was, as he himself has often told me, to look upon religions as the work of men, but to respect them everywhere as a powerful engine of government. However, I will not go so far as to say that he would not have changed his religion had the conquest of the East been the price of that change.
All that he said about Mahomet, Islamism, and the Koran to the great men of the country he laughed at himself. He enjoyed the gratification of having all his fine sayings on the subject of religion translated into Arabic poetry, and repeated from mouth to mouth. This of course tended to conciliate the people."
(That part in bold for the hard of thinking)
"I confess that Bonaparte frequently conversed with the chiefs of the Mussulman religion on the subject of his conversion; but only for the sake of amusement. The priests of the Koran, who would probably have been delighted to convert us, offered us the most ample concessions. But these conversations were merely started by way of entertainment, and never could have warranted a supposition of their leading to any serious result.
If Bonaparte spoke as a Mussulman, it was merely in his character of a military and political chief in a Mussulman country. To do so was essential to his success, to the safety of his army, and, consequently, to his glory. In every country he would have drawn up proclamations and delivered addresses on the same principle. In India he would have been for Ali, at Thibet for the Dalai-lama, and in China for Confucius."
http://infomotions.com/etexts/gutenberg/dirs/etext02/nb03v11.htm
So there you have it. Napoleon’s much vaunted praise of Islam was simply a rhetorical ploy to placate the Egyptians and garner their support. Although the reference to his sayings being translated into Arabic poetry does offer a possible source for Cherfils’ quote, it’s clear that Napoleon no more “believed in the unity of the Koran” than he believed in Santa Claus.
Isn’t it amazing how, thanks to this marvellous electric Interweb gizmo, an obscure quote from a forgotten French book can be twisted by the tinfoil hat brigade into a shadowy governmental plot to fulfil the supposed “legacy” of a long-dead European dictator.
Leon, you owe Federenko an apology. Hopefully, we won't see your phoney Pro-Islamist propaganda posted on here again.
From this side of the pond, it looks like Europe must move quickly, and America not far behind. Below is a preamble draft to a note I will submit later urging a Tenth Crusade.
THE TENTH CRUSADE: EUROPE HAS NO CHOICE
The first nine Crusades were undertaken to free formerly Christian lands in the Middle East from conquering Islam.
If Europe is to survive today, it must physically turn back the Islamic tide with forced repatriation of all Muslims beginning as soon as possible. It must launch the Tenth Crusade within each country's borders. To do otherwise is to accept, within a generation, the specter of Islamic dominance, subjugation, conversion, dhimmitude and possibly murder of native Europeans at the scale of the holocaust, as called for under Sharia law for "non-believers" who refuse to pay the Jizzah.
To execute the Tenth Crusade, European countries must individually sever their relations with the tyrannical EU that created and has perpetuated the Muslim disaster and elect national leaders and legislative leaders dedicated first and foremost to breaking the EU connection and the elimination of the Islamic threat.
Whether Turkey is admitted is no longer relevant if the EU is disbanded. Turkey is not and cannot be a part of Europe as an Islamic country.
Practice of the Muslim religion or customs in public must be banned. Mosques and Madressas must be closed.
Wahabbi and other radical imams must be deported as soon as possible.
All Muslims in government, education, military or police agencies must be discharged immediately.
Islamic TV such as Al Jazeera, and Islamic radio must be jammed, and Islamic newspapers and magazines banned. Muslim Possession of telephones or radio transmitters must be banned. By reducing the ability to communicate, a major tool for terror will be blocked until the deportation is completed.
**** The rest is still in rougher draft form and needs polishing. Note agreement with Fjordman on the need to dissolve the EU. A key aspect will the necessity of temporary authority to get the job done that may border on police state methods. Actually these methods might be considered as dhimmitude in reverse, except the objective will be total deportation. I do not believe there is any choice now.
Posted by: Jimmy Bones at February 11, 2008 2:17 AMMatamoros wrote:
Leon, you owe Federenko an apology. Hopefully, we won't see your phoney Pro-Islamist propaganda posted on here again.
...........................
I myself am no great admirer of Napolean--I believe he did much to set back the enlightenment and nascent democracy in Europe--but I have never had any reason to believe that he was a great supporter of Islam, far from it.
I am not familiar with the provenance of the ascribed Napolean quote--you may well be right that this was no more than an example of political expediancy, meant for a local audience.
Whatever the case, though, anyone familiar with Leon the Pig Farmer's views would *never* characterize his posts as "phoney Pro-Islamist propaganda". I may not always agree with every single point he makes, but he is fighting the good fight, and certainly no apologist for Islamists.
Posted by: gravenimage at February 11, 2008 3:35 PMGravenimage
That quote can be found on thousands of Islamic websites. Therefore it is pro-Islamist propaganda, and doesn't belong on here.
Only an idiot would believe that Napoleon was "a great believer in the Koran etc" . A bigger idiot would repeat that falsehood on here. But it takes a special kind of simpleton to turn one obscure quote into proof of a grand conspiracy to re-populate Europe with Muslims at the behest of Napoleon Bonaparte.
Enter Leon...
Posted by: Matamoros at February 12, 2008 3:38 AMComments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)