On This Day In 732, Charles the Hammer Stopped Islam's Advance on the West


Islam conquered most of the Middle East and North Africa and then came across the Straights of Gibraltar and conquered Spain, subjugating the people under Islamic rule, giving the European (mostly Christian and Jewish) people the choice of conversion to Islam or perpetual underling status burdened with a tax on non-Muslims (vital funds Muslims used to finance further conquests).

Islamic armies moved north into what is now France (known as Gaul at the time). That was the high-water mark of Islam's first major invasion of Europe, because it was there they were stopped.

After several large battles, the Islamic hordes were defeated by an army led by Charles Martel, who came to be known as Charles the Hammer. The final and decisive battle occurred on October 11th, 732, one hundred years after the death of Mohammad.

Europe is being invaded again by Islamic hordes. This time they are being welcomed in by people ignorant of history and ignorant of Islamic doctrine.

People who are committed to Islam's political goal of world domination have been swarming into Europe by the millions, gaining more and more political clout and winning more and more battles as Europeans concede their freedoms, their land, and their money to this aggressive and relentless ideology.

But they will be stopped. Europeans are not spineless people. Not even all of Europe's politicians are spineless. Islam was stopped before — despite the fact that many European kings had made deals and allied themselves with the Muslims to gain a temporary political advantage. It was happening then. It is happening now.

But Europe is waking up and so is America, Australia, and India. The more people know about basic Islamic doctrine, the more immune they become to the political manipulations of orthodox Muslims. Concessions made will be revoked. The West will rise again and stop Islam for the third time.

To fortify our commitment to our future victory, today we honor the fighting spirit of Charles the Hammer.

Read more about this historical event: Remembering the Battle of Tours.

Still more: Today in History: The Battle of Tours by Raymond Ibrahim.


Waging Jihad by Gaining Concessions


If your goal was the eventual overthrow of the government and establishing sharia law as the law of the land, but you didn't have a large enough majority to do it by voting or by force, how could you do it? One good way would be to keep pressing for small, incremental concessions. And when you gain one, to hold it, and try to gain another.

And if you were using this strategy, what is the first concession you'd try to gain? I think it would be to establish laws and cultural norms that prohibit criticism of your group or its goals in speech or writing. This could effectively prevent an organized effort to block the next concessions you try to gain.

That is exactly what orthodox Muslims are trying to do.

Every totalitarian state that ever ruled a nation has done the same thing, and did it first. If you can't criticize something in public, you are left with your private thoughts and your few intimate friends. Are you the only ones who think this way? You don't know. Silencing criticism isolates the dissenters. And it prevents important public discussions from taking place.

Silencing criticism makes it possible for other concessions to be gained without effective opposition.

Earnest Muslims are using every method they can think of to shut down criticism and free speech. They legally lobby politicians and media outlets, pressuring them to silence or fire someone who criticized Islam. They slander anyone who criticizes Islam by calling them "Islamophobic" or "racist." They bring lawsuits against people even if they know they will not win because the bad press is damaging enough. And they riot in the streets. After a Dutch newspaper published a cartoon depicting Mohammad, Muslims rioted all over Europe, leaving 187 people dead and making publishers think twice about publishing something critical to Islam again.

And this aggressive religion will keep pushing unless we stop it. A sufficient number of them will not try to be fair, will not try to "assimilate," and will never let up on the pressure to take over. It is their religious duty.

The way to stop its spread without being cruel or violent is to establish the policy: No more concessions to Islam.

I once had a job working for a seminar company. My job was to call people who had taken an introductory seminar and convince them to take the main seminar we were selling. I was given a stack of cards participants had filled out at the introductory seminar and I was told how to handle the calls: "If they give you a definite 'no,' throw the card away. Otherwise put it here and we'll call them again later."

And we would keep calling these people, harassing them for years because those people were too nice to simply say, "I am not interested." People would say, "I don't know, let me think about it." They would say all kinds of things other than "no." I could hear in their voices that most of them really wanted to say no, but they wouldn't. I felt sorry for these people, and yet I couldn't help but think they were stupid. Why not be firm? Why not be honest? It would save them a lot of stress. If only they knew my instructions, they would have said no firmly right up front.

But the thing is, most of us are used to dealing with people who will not exploit our "niceness." We deal with fair, considerate people almost all the time, and our ways of dealing with fair people work very well. I'm assuming you are a fair person. What do you do? If someone gave you a "socially acceptable" excuse like "I'll think about it," you would let them bow out, wouldn't you? You wouldn't ignore their signals and keep pushing.

But here's what we all have to learn sooner or later: For people who ignore your signals and keep pushing, you had better develop a different approach — an approach with more firmness and strength, an approach that protects yourself and defends your interests.

The same goes for dealing with aggressive vacuum-cleaner salesmen. Have they ever come to your door? If you show the slightest interest, you'll be stuck talking to them until you say yes. They are relentless, and to deal with it, you had better be firm. If you say, "I'm busy right now," they will say, "That's okay, when would be a good time to come back?"

Islam operates much the same, except on a much larger scale with a political agenda and more deadly consequences. Islam is pressing for concessions constantly, trying to find the weaknesses, trying to find the cracks, the loopholes, and it will keep pushing until it accomplishes its goal: A world in which every country is ruled by sharia law.

This is not one of those problems that will go away by itself. It is up to us to be firm. They are not going to stop on their own. They must be stopped by us.

Read more: Islam's Relentless Encroachment.

Learn how they can be stopped by us: What Can a Civilian Do to Stop Islam's Relentless Encroachment?


That Day

This is a video about one of the best things that happened on 9/11. Sometimes human beings are beautiful.

The Boatlift

The video is about 12 minutes long. It will remind you of that fateful day. Let us never forget.


Why the Peaceful Majority Might be Dangerous


The following is an article from Paul Marek (author of the outstanding piece, Why the Peaceful Majority is Irrelevant). Reprinted with permission.

Mubarka is a Canadian born woman of Pakistani parents. She grew up in Toronto among other Canadian children and attended university where she received a degree in commerce. Today she holds a prominent position with a transportation company.

Mubarka used to be as mainstream as any Canadian young adult can be; in fact, those who met her for the first time may have been struck by her vivacious personality. Her effervescence went hand in hand with her distinct Asian beauty which she shamelessly displayed with stylish clothing including the occasional low cut top. Mubarka used to converse for hours over topics as varied as business practices in Canadian politics to contemporary music.

It comes, therefore, as a shock, when one learns what path Mubarka has recently chosen for herself. She will be wedding a Pakistani man...a devout Muslim, whom she has never met but who was chosen for her when she was an infant. Not only that, but she has donned the Hijab for the first time in her life and is strictly observing Muslim tenets. She has chosen subservience to a man and subservience to his religion over the gender freedom offered her by the Western democracy she grew up in, and she's done so without so much as a whimper of protest.

When asked why she has picked the life of Sharia, Mubarka simply states that it is as Muhammad would will, and that there is no greater prophet than Muhammad. When asked how she will raise her children, Mubarka makes it clear...they will be raised as Muslims first, and Canadians second.

Hardi is perhaps one of the most pleasant Canadian women anyone could ever meet. In her capacity as a caregiver of seniors, she is gentle, loving, and incredibly patient. She laughs deliciously at the kind of comical moments that only seniors can deliver and her mood seems to be permanently stuck on happy. Hardi is an angel.

Those who encounter Hardi for the first time will be struck not by her character, that comes later, but by the fact that she is virtually covered from head to toe by traditional Indonesian Muslim attire. She covers her entire body with colourful costume that leaves only her hands and face exposed. Hardi is devout, in fact, so devout that during Christmas any appreciation given her by way of gifting must be void of any reference to the season. Furthermore, during quiet moments when Hardi is free to discuss her Muslim faith, it becomes clear she believes wholeheartedly in the strict observance of Sharia. For her, Islam in its pure non-secular form, is truth.

Both Hardi and Mubarka present us with a perplexing conundrum because they are members of what has become known as the "peaceful" Muslim majority. They don't have a violent bone in their bodies, and are clearly law abiding and productive members of Canadian society. But, they are also both part of a very small minority within Canada where they and their fellow Muslims have very little effect on Canadian politics or on the evolution of Canadian cultural norms. What if though, Hardi and Mubarka were part of a Muslim majority where they and their co-religionists held the power?

Both women are Muslims first and Canadians second. No matter how much respect one may have for either woman's character, there is little doubt where either would place her loyalty if faced with choosing between the Canadian traditions of liberty for all, or Sharia. There is also little doubt that if they were part of a majority, they would acquiesce to the demands of the Muslim clerical class and choose Sharia for all Canadians.

It is therefore irrelevant in the grand scheme of things whether or not Hardi or Mubarka are "good" people; most people on the planet are, no matter their religion, race, or culture. What matters in the greater sense, is that as parts of the Muslim collective, neither woman would set aside her Muslim beliefs in order to safeguard and protect the full rights of non-Muslims to live as they choose. What's even more disturbing, is that both women have experienced the gender freedoms afforded them in Canada, yet both have voluntarily resigned themselves to the greater Muslim collective.

As long as each woman is part of a small minority within Canada, she offers Canada much; but once she becomes part of a significant minority, or heaven forbid, a majority, she becomes dangerous. Why? Because Muslims wherever they form a majority choose Islamic norms over the broader more tolerant standards of the West. If given a chance, as has been clearly demonstrated the world over, they would unravel hundreds of years of hard fought human rights gains and replace them with the medieval practices of their faith. As such, both Hardi and Mubarka are simply bit players in a monstrous and destructive Muslim vortex that would drag civilization backwards hundreds of years.


A Liberal With Zero Tolerance For Islam


On the article, Muslims Are Not What Is Wrong With Islam, someone made the following comment:

I am a liberal with zero tolerance for Islam. Having studied this pseudo-religion for three decades, I can say with certainty that there is nothing positive or spiritual about it. Islam has no redeeming characteristics. It is simply a totalitarian, imperialistic ideology with a thin veneer of religion to dupe the ignorant and lull the complacent. I pity Muslims for having been brainwashed, but that doesn't mean that I think Islam should be tolerated in liberal democracies. It is completely incompatible with Universal human rights.

There's no reason why the percentage of liberals (at the moment, 51 percent) who understand the problem of Islam couldn't be as large as conservatives (82 percent) or even larger. If that seems hard to imagine, check this out: Liberals Can Remain Liberals and Still Recognize Islam as a Threat.

Liberals and conservatives may disagree on many things, but against Islamization, we can and should stand united.



All writing on CitizenWarrior.com is copyright © CitizenWarrior.com 2001-2099, all rights reserved.

Article Spotlight

One of the most unusual articles on CitizenWarrior.com is Pleasantville and Islamic Supremacism.

It illustrates the Islamic Supremacist vision by showing the similarity between what happened in the movie, Pleasantville, and what devout fundamentalist Muslims are trying to create in Islamic states like Syria, Pakistan, or Saudi Arabia (and ultimately everywhere in the world).

Click here to read the article.

Citizen Warrior Heroes

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Visit the blog: Citizen Warrior Heroes.

No More Concessions to Islam

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Visit the blog: Concessions to Islam.

  © Free Blogger Templates Columnus by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP