| Tweet |
|
|
|
A growth of Islamic sympathy seems to penetrate American culture. Muslims are gaining respect and favor in the media and the political machine, as well as preference in the work place and academic arena. Islam is touted as a religion of peace with well-meaning cordial individuals who seek to live peaceable lives, under nominal tenets of Islamic culture and society; only the “radicals” are portrayed as violent or extreme. In the United States, Islam is no longer a religion of foreigners but a religion of United States citizens who strive to identify with mainstream American culture. However, is there a compatible relationship with the Crescent moon of the East and the Cross of the West? Does not Islam’s history testify of its mission to eviscerate Western Christian thought and vow to bring the West into submission before Allah? Under the mantra of media confessionalism, Islam is espoused as a religion of peace. However, history reveals a different kind of Islam, the true Islam. The threat of Islamic domination is a perilous affair that needs to be analyzed through the lens of its historical context.
Is Islam a deadly threat to Western culture and civilization? Why not just agree with the media pundits and assume Islam is nothing more than a religion of peaceful congregants and leave history in the past? In fact, instead of presuming the worst of Islam, why not just desensitize any preconceived ideas and embrace the religion? Unfortunately, the reality of Islamic supremacy will not allow a formal compliance to exist between the East and the West. Critics of Islam argue that the tenets of Islam are antithetical to the teachings of Christianity and Judaism. Others argue that Christianity, Islam, and Judaism, are the three major religions of the world and overlap one another. But if the religions overlap one another or have some form of truth within each system, why can’t these three religions live peaceable?
The truth of the matter is that Islam is not a religion of peace and never was a religion of peace. Since its inception, Islam has sought to conquer the world for Allah, ever since its bloodthirsty adherents swept out the Arabian Peninsula over a millennium ago. Islam in Arabic is defined as “an act of submission to Allah.” As faithful Muslims carry out their eschatological ambitions by bringing the world into submission to Allah, how does this submission transpire? For the Muslim there is a twofold eschatological fulfillment when exercising submission to Allah. One consists of bring the infidel (non-believer) into submission to Allah via conversion to Islam. Second, if conversion is not confessed, Islamic teaching allows Muslims to kill non-Muslims. In addition, a more modern tactic Muslims have initiated is the hijacking of the politically correct circuit calling any resistance to Islam a potential hate crime. Another strategy Muslims seek to implement is Islamic dominion through the legislation of Sharia law. The goal of Islam is not to live peaceably with other religions or with non-Muslim ethnic groups, but to dominate or annihilate them. The motivation for Islamic evangelism is conversion or death. Our European ancestors were well aware of this Islamic quest, and they were not naive of the implications of Islamic ideology or its adherents landing on the shores of old Europe. As a result, old Europe understood that the spread of Islam into Europe would mean the end of Christian Europe and of the distinct Europeans peoples.
The 16th century was a turbulent time for Europe, as the Crescent moon sought to annihilate the Cross. However, there were men who had vowed to stop the onslaught of Turkish Islamic invaders. Old European knights, specifically those of the Knights of Hospitallers (also known as the Knights of St. John), were one of these groups who were determined to block the Islamic Turkish invasion of Europe however they could. The Knights of St. John were men of noble character, dedicated to the cross of Christ and His Kingdom. Conflict with the Mohammedans in Jerusalem resulted in the Knights withdrawing from Jerusalem in 1291. The Order of St. John eventually took residence on the Greek Island of Rhodes. During the 15th century, the Knights succeeded in defeating the Ottoman Turks in two battles, one in 1444 against the sultan of Egypt, and another in 1480 against Sultan Mehmed. Both battles were victories for the dedicated Christian knights, although the Islamic trespassers were not finished with seeking to enter Europe.
In 1522, Suleiman the Magnificent launched a massive assault on the Island of Rhodes and finally succeeded in conquering the island and driving out the Knights. Even though the Knights had seven thousand men to oppose the invaders, they were no match for the two hundred thousand Turkish Mohammedans. In 1530, Suleiman the Magnificent launched another assault on the shores of Europe by initiating a siege on the city of Vienna. Fortunately, Suleiman was not successful in his conquest; during the siege he encountered an Austrian kingdom not willing to submit to a Turkish invasion. By God’s good providence, the kingdom proved a worthy adversary to Suleiman and threw the Turks back.
Disenchanted with his defeat at Vienna and desiring to expand his foothold into Europe, Suleiman theorized that if he could come at Europe from the south, then he could conquer the continent. His strategy was to conquer Malta (a small island south of Sicily), then conquer Sicily, and then conquer Rome. However, Suleiman never made it past Malta due to the Knights of St. John, who had headquarted there, after the fall of Rhodes, along with a contingency of 6,500 Maltese natives and other Europeans. The Muslim contingency brought over 40,000 warriors to conquer the small Maltese island. If the Islamic Turks took Malta, Italy and the rest of Europe would be left very exposed. Providentially, Suleiman’s conquering dream never came to fruition. Though greatly outnumbered, the 6,500 European fighting force withstood the fanatical Muslims, thus blocking the Islamic invasion into Europe.
The old Europe had a Godly sense of identity and nationhood. Even under the pressures of the fratricidal wars that plagued Europe, there still remained a strong Christian identity for the European peoples. The folk of the old Europe took seriously the implications of racial and religious integration. The Islamic menace was not only a religious matter but also a cultural and ethnic concern. If Islam was not blocked, the old Europe would have lost the millennial blessings of homogenous people groups. Valiantly, the old Europe contended to preserve ethnic and religious identity, and they fought to sterilize Islamic expansion, eventually succeeding in pushing it back into Asia.
If the old Europe understood the implications of the Islamic war machine, then what do we make of the new Europe’s view of the Islamic threat? In our country, Muslims are readily accepted. It’s not uncommon for most European Americans to have a Muslim neighbor. Further, the mainstream media has promoted a positive image of the Islamic invasion. In turn, Muslims have adopted the politically correct ideology of leftist propagandists. This religious and media union has birthed a new form of Islamic conquerors. The old Europe contended with a violent and hostile Muslim, while the new Europe contends with a politically correct Trojan horse. Still violent in nature and doctrine, the Islamic desire to see the West fall has not ceased from the minds of true Muslims. If Islam cannot take the West by violence, which may yet still happen, Islam intends to simply outbreed Western civilization. The new Europe must face the hard reality: there’s an Islamic threat seeking to destroy the foundations of Western Christian society using the weapons of immigration and demographics.
Post-9/11 European-Americans have a greater understanding of Islamic radicalism and the implication of embracing such beliefs. However, do most European Americans understand the repercussions of entertaining any tolerant cohabitation with Islam? Of welcoming millions of Middle Eastern Muslims into our land? For example, when it became news that an Islamic mosque was in the process of being built only a block or so away from Ground Zero, most European-Americans displayed outrage at such an action. But if European-Americans are outraged that a mosque is built in New York City next to a site supposedly destroyed by Islamic terrorists, then why should they not be consistent and declare an absolute prohibition of any mosque in the United States? This Ground Zero mosque victory will not matter if in fifty years America is a Muslim state due to demographic changes. If we are not willing to restrict Islam everywhere and only restrict it to the confines of a small city block, then we’ll have allowed Islam to succeed and spread in the United States. The result is victory for Islam and defeat for Western culture. Ground Zero is considered sacred ground by many European-Americans–but how much more should our homelands and the nations that our folk have built be considered sacred ground too, every inch worth fighting for? Our Christian faith and national homelands are sacred gifts bestowed on us; and it should be our Christian duty to preserve our faith and homogeneity as a sacred heritage.
If our European ancestors were willing to sacrifice their lives for the sake of family and faith to fight the Muslim plague, how much more should we contend to preserve our not-so-distant European Christian identity in the face of Islamic domination? The men of old who defended ancient European soil understood the significance of religious and ethnic amalgamation. May we recapture the old and seek to purge Western civilization from the modern Islamic invader.
