18 May America’s 250th Birthday – Preserving Freedom from Islam
England just completed on May 16 a pro-freedom, pro-Christian heritage rally in London[1]. America just completed on May 17 a pro-freedom, pro-Christian heritage “Rededication 250” rally on the national mall in Washington, D.C.
These events followed an American public read-the-Bible-aloud-from-front-to-back program, as well as President Trump’s proclamation of a national shabbat, or ‘Shabbat 250’, calling upon all Americans, Jew and non-Jew, to join in celebration of one holy day of shabbat as a recognition of spiritual alignment and historical gratitude.
All of these events represent an implicit or, in England’s case, an explicit and massive rejection of Islam by the so-called ‘ordinary people’ of western civilization. The ‘diversity is our strength’ mantra of foolish secular intellectuals—e.g., UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer—has given way to the social media meme: ‘Remigration or Extinction’.
These events further confirm: the pace of growing western public awareness of the truly foreign nature of Islam and the Islamic law known as sharia is accelerating, and not a moment too soon.
_______________
America was put on its back foot in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks because of President Bush’s determination not to identify Islam as the problem.
President Bush may have been well-meaning in his determination—dearly hoping and preferring to contain the conflict to a war on a tactic (a/k/a ‘war on terror’) rather than an instinctively feared conflict between religions; or, he and his advisors may have been so behind the learning curve as to Islam as to be genuinely ignorant of the irreconcilable conflict between Islam and America as founded.
Whatever the explanation for Bush’s approach, he stated in his post-9/11 joint address to Congress:
The terrorists practice a fringe form of Islamic extremism that has been rejected by Muslim scholars and the vast majority of Muslim clerics — a fringe movement that perverts the peaceful teachings of Islam. The terrorists’ directive commands them to kill Christians and Jews, to kill all Americans, and make no distinction among military and civilians, including women and children.
It is hard to pack more untruth into such a short paragraph, and Americans (and western civilization) have been learning this hard reality ever since.
The 9/11 terrorists did not practice ‘a fringe form of Islamic extremism’ that ‘perverts the peaceful teachings of Islam’; they followed the literal teachings of the Koran.
Islam—by the express terms of its teachings—is not and has never been a religion of peace, or a religion that orders its adherents to live in peace with adherents of other religions. It has a 14-century record of violence in pursuit of conquest.
These violent teachings have not been ‘rejected by Muslim scholars and the vast majority of Muslim clerics’. There is virtually NO Islamic cleric and no serious Muslim ‘scholar’—much less a ‘vast majority’ of them—who have renounced or will publicly renounce these teachings because to do so would put them at risk of being killed by Muslim jihadis.
And the command to “kill Christians and Jews, to kill all Americans, and make no distinction among military and civilians, including women and children” is NOT a ‘terrorists’ directive’; it is the teaching of Islam for Christians and Jews who do not submit or convert.
President Bush may believe he spoke the truth in September 2001 insofar as he then understood it, but the 25 years since have brought Americans (and Englanders, as well as the native people of virtually all UK and western European countries) rapidly up the learning curve.
Clear critical thinking re Islam is coming on strong.
____________________
As noted in a previous post on this Substack:
The critical, divinely inspired ideals of the Declaration of Independence could not possibly have emerged from an Islamic society.
As explained in another post on this Substack:
The Declaration [of Independence] is final: all men and women are created equal.
Sharia makes women, expressly and unambiguously, unequal and subordinate to men.
These two positions cannot be reconciled; there is no middle ground.
The Declaration is final: all individuals are endowed by God (of the Bible) with unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Sharia compels the deprivation of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness—a/k/a killing—of those who violate sharia precepts: a Muslim cannot leave Islam; the attempt to do so (apostasy) is punishable by death; one cannot criticize or question Mohammed or sharia; doing so is punishable by death. These edicts do not emanate from the God of the Bible; they emanate from Mohammed’s Allah.
These two positions cannot be reconciled; they posit radically conflicting ‘gods’ and worldviews, and drive radically conflicting consequences in society—e.g., is the Islam-sanctioned killing of an apostate prosecutable homicide in America, or not? (Politics is downstream of culture, and culture is downstream of predominant theology.)
The Declaration is final: the only just government is government that emerges from the consent of the governed.
Sharia is both ancient and permanent; it can never be amended or adjusted by anyone, [not even by the majority] consent of those subject to it.
These two positions cannot be reconciled; America under the Declaration enables its self-governing citizenry to be free to establish new laws and amend or repeal old laws as new times and circumstances may require; Islam requires its adherents to submit unconditionally [and forever] to sharia—an unchanging and all-encompassing regimen of ancient laws.
_________________
None of this means Americans ‘hate’ people who identify as Muslim; nor do Americans fail to recognize that many millions or even hundreds of millions of Muslims have not committed violent jihad. It does mean that:
(1) Americans recognize animating theologies or ideologies are extremely important in defining what constitutes civil society;
(2) Such theologies or ideologies have a substantial effect on culture as a whole; and
(3) When two such conflicting theologies cannot be reconciled, they must not and cannot be made to coexist. Muslims apparently agree with Americans on this point, as there are essentially no Christian churches allowed in Islamic-controlled countries.
Muslims residing in America who stand opposed to sharia and are openly committed to abiding by the American Constitution and rule of law can be in a position to be or remain oath-affirming American citizens. Muslims residing in America who are insistent on practicing sharia can remigrate to a Muslim-majority country, and the US federal government would be wise to financially subsidize such remigration.
These two choices for Muslims in America do not violate America’s ‘freedom of religion’ because the Constitution has no suicide pact with Islam, and sedition is a crime.
______________
America doesn’t impose its Judeo-Christian/government ideology on others; in the aftermath of WWII, as the only nation with nuclear weapons, America could have conquered and imposed its ideology on any nation, just by the threat of using those weapons. But it didn’t; it acted instead to help rebuild even its enemies, and without regard to the religions or belief systems of those enemies.
It is Islam that has forever sought global conquest in order to impose an Islamic caliphate governed by sharia.
The idea that a Muslim separation/remigration from America can be implemented peacefully can easily be dismissed, at least initially, as a naïve pipe dream. But the 25 years since 9/11 have changed Americans’ awareness of the Islamic threat to their 250-year heritage of freedom. They now know that heritage is imminently and directly at risk. They are not going to give it up, and they will defend it, fiercely. In this context, an intelligent and compassionate remigration plan, far from being a pipe dream, may look more and more viable and desirable—to Muslims and non-Muslims alike.
Let’s hope the Islamic ‘scholars’ and Muslim clerics and leaders of today will formally, officially and permanently foreswear violence in pursuit of a worldwide caliphate, and agree to confine the practice of or adherence to sharia to countries that have already chosen to embrace it.
Not in America.
Eric Georgatos
[1] Crowd-size pictures and estimates for the London rally seem to have become a point of contention in social media. The important point is that the rally did in fact occur; that it so frightened PM Keir Starmer as to cause him to invoke special procedures for banning ‘foreign’ visitors from attending; and that it followed very recent UK elections that resulted in an historic level of losses for Starmer’s governing party. It’s safe to say interest in and support of the rally was top of mind among millions of Brits, whether or not they chose to personally attend.
First posted on America Can We Talk Substack.