We have yet to identify the enemy. The enemy is not ISIS (or ISIL, as Barack Obama pleases himself to call it). The enemy is not “radical” Islam. The enemy is ISLAM without any adjectives. Unless we face this awesome truth, and attack the centers from which Islam spreads throughout the world, there will be no end to the slaughter that took place in Paris and in San Bernardino. And far worse is yet to come!

An implacable enemy

All talk about fighting and defeating ISIS is mere verbiage as long as Barack Obama and his minions are in power.

The 2016 election will not change this, because ISIS is just a facade for the real enemy: ISLAM.

It’s not enough to say that with ISIS as the enemy, we are involved in a world war. We are in a world war but the war is with Islam. Until Islam is destroyed – destroyed as a world religion , or whatever other name you want to describe Islam, the war will continue.

The West, steeped in secularism or liberalism or multicultural relativism, will not and cannot fight this war. This means that Democracy cannot fight this war and overcome Islam. Democracy is a dead fish, and a dead fish can’t swim against the tide, the liberalism and nihilism that dominate the colleges and universities of the West, the academies that mass produce our opinion makers, policy makers, lawmakers, and decision makers – Presidents and Prime Ministers alike.

Indeed, once Islam has nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles the war will be over: Islam will rule the world.

Just as Nazism had to be destroyed, so must Islam. The trouble is that liberals (and even conservatives) are not psychologically prepared to wage a war to the finish against a religion parading as monotheism. And all we have are colleges and universities that mass-produce liberal and multicultural moral relativists – Obamanists.

A proper form of enemy identification

Islamic Imperialism (2006) is the title of Efraim Karsh’s illuminating book on Islam’s relentless, global ambition. You don’t have to read very far into Professor Karsh’s book to see the validity of his thesis. The first page of his Introduction begins with four revealing quotes:

• “I was ordered to fight all men until they say ‘There is no god but Allah.’” – Prophet Muhammad’s farewell address, March 632
• “I shall cross this sea to their islands to pursue them until there remains no one on the face of the earth who does not acknowledge Allah.” – Saladin, January 1189
• “We shall export our revolution throughout the world … until the calls ’there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah’ are echoed all over the world.” – Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, 1979

Karsh goes beyond those who rightly interpret Islam’s 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center as symbolic of a “clash of civilizations.”

As for the legions of commentators who portray Islam as a “religion of peace” hijacked by Muslim extremists – this is sheer nonsense. Karsh brilliantly reformulates the dynamism of Islam going back to Muhammad himself. He shows that in contrast to the gradual development of Christianity and its doctrine of separating the church from the state, the birth of Islam was initially and ideologically linked to the creation of a world power. Karsh boldly states that “Muhammad used God’s name to build an earthly kingdom”—the goal of Islam to this day.
By rejecting the dichotomy of God and Caesar, Islam rejected the very concept of independent nation-states. For Muhammad and all true believers, there is only the Muslim nation, the umma, and it has no borders. A world empire has thus been the logic of Islam since its inception.

[adsense midpost]

Moreover, whereas Western imperialism maintained political and cultural separation from its colonies in Africa, the Middle East, and Asia, Islamic imperialism spread throughout these continents by converting the inhabitants to the creed of Muhammad.

And insofar as Islam tolerated, when it did not slaughter, these “infidels,” the surviving victims were reduced to a condition of “dhimmitude,” which, according to Bat Ye’or, was often worse than slavery.

On the other hand, some Muslim rulers, says Karsh,

were less interested in the mass conversion of the conquered populations than in enjoying the material fruits of their subjugation. For them the triumph of Islam was not only a religious and cultural issue, it was also a territorial and political matter. The lands Muslims occupied became an integral part of the House of Islam, whether or not most of their inhabitants became Muslims.

A rare slip from the enemy

The inescapable logic of Islamic doctrine, fortified by a lust for Islam’s lost and lamented glory, is the inexorable reason why no Arab or Muslim ruler has ever recognized, except for tactical reasons, the land called “Palestine” as separate from the House of Islam. Arab rhetoric about a “Palestinian” state is intended solely for Western consumption—and it also prompts the US and the EU to bankroll the Palestinians and their supremely cunning terrorist leaders.

Karsh quotes the Arab-American historian Philip Hitti who, in 1946, described the common Arab view: “There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not.” Palestine was never “perceived as a distinct entity deserving national self-determination but as an integral part of a unified regional Arab order, no element of which should be conceded at any cost.”

In the words of Hamas leader, Mahmoud al-Zahar:

Islamic views reject the notion of establishing an independent Palestinian state … [Hence] our main goal is to establish a great Islamic state, be it pan-Arabic or pan-Islamic.

These Saladins now have within their reach weapons of mass destruction. This makes the world-conquering aspiration of Islam in the past Islam’s vision of the future.

Even now, with more than a thousand mosques in the United States, imams are preaching anti-Americanism, anti-Semitism, and Islamic imperialism.

What statesman has the courage to call upon his country to go on the offensive against Islam, now spreading throughout the world? Even after the blood bath in Paris, we have yet to identify the enemy: ISLAM.

But what statesman will even think of declaring war against this enemy? ISIS, yes, but ISIS is only a dodge for the real enemy, ISLAM,□

[adsense leadout]