From The Gathering Storm Blog

The definition of intimidation is to create fear in order to influence conduct. Of all the softening up tactics used by the fascists of the 1930s, this one was the most atrocious and the most visible. The process of intimidation and humiliation combined to create a climate, conducive to the oppression of one group by another.

Intimidation worked wonders for the Fascists of the 1930s. It’s doing the same today for the Islamists. There are distinct and troubling parallels between the intimidation tactics of the fascist of the 1930s and the Islamist of today.

Naw…It can’t happen here. Right?

Think again. Let’s take one small example – and one that going global.

Over at Family Security matters, Susan MacAllen of the Family Security Foundation wrote a piece called The Muslim Cab War in Minneapolis: Coming to Your Neighborhood Soon.

Discrimination against non-Muslim Americans is alive and well in Minneapolis and, as many of us could have predicted, the Minneapolis International Airport is finally being forced to do something about it. The hoopla began last October, when the media picked up a story that Muslim cabbies at the airport were refusing service to passengers carrying alcohol. This consisted mainly of unopened bottles that had been purchased during wine tours, or at the duty-free shop. The cab drivers argued that alcohol violated the tenets of Islam. (They also refused to pick up passengers at liquor stores and bars.)

In November, the controversy was given greater exposure when Muslim drivers refused transport to passengers with dogs – including those with seeing-eye or other service dogs, in direct violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

Unless they’ve been reading the MSM, that’s pretty much of what the general public knows at this point. But this is not a recent issue and it’s no longer local.

o When the issue hit the major media in Oct/Nov of 2006, it simultaneously hit the international media – due to a surge of similar incidents – in Australia, Canada, England, The Netherlands and Norway. Coincidence?

o MAS was founded by U.S. members of the Muslim Brotherhood, a group originating in Egypt, with a long history of terrorist ties throughout the Middle East. The cabbies also received loud support from CAIR – Council for American-Islamic Relations – a controversial organization with monetary and loyalty ties to militant Islamic groups in the Middle East (and with whom Minnesota Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), a proclaimed Muslim, is closely affiliated).

o Muslims who refuse transport to passengers with dogs or alcohol have frequently cited Islamic law as the reason, which specifically states that these things are amongst the “najis”, or the unclean. Contact with such things – however distant apparently – requires ritualistic purification before prayer. The commonly accepted list of najis – there are ten – includes pigs, dogs, urine, feces, semen, alcohol and Kafirs (non-Muslims).

o In 1997 a Muslim cab driver yanked a passenger out of his cab before her service dog could enter, shouting, “No dog! No dog! Get out! Get out!” injuring her. (He was sentenced to 120 days of community service at the Lighthouse of the Blind.) In Cincinnati in 1999, a blind passenger was refused entry with her dog. In both these instances, CAIR came to the public defense of the Muslims involved. In similar cases in Canada in 2000 and 2003, a passenger was refused cab entry with a service dog, one of many such incidents, and a blind woman was refused entry into a Muslim-owned convenience story with her dog. In November of last year, a Florida man was noisily thrown out of a convenience store because he had a service dog.

What’s happening here? Are we seeing the end result of our surrender to another culture in the service of multiculturalism? Are the Islamists seeing this resignation as a sign of submission to the Islamist ideology and Shari law? Are they seeing this submission by non-Muslims as another victory in the war against the non-Muslim world?

Damn Right!

Anyone following the news on the starboard side of the bloggosphere might feel that there’s been an increasing up tick in frequency of intimidations by Muslims. They just may be right.

Daniel Pipes reports:

“The violence by Muslims responding to comments by the pope fit a pattern that has been building and accelerating since 1989. Six times since then, Westerners did or said something that triggered death threats and violence in the Muslim world. Looking at them in the aggregate offers useful insights.”

  • 1989 – Salman Rushdie‘s novel, The Satanic Verses prompted Ayatollah Khomeini to issue a death edict against him and his publishers, on the grounds that the book “is against Islam, the Prophet, and the Koran.” Subsequent rioting led to over 20 deaths, mostly in India.
  • 1997 – The U.S. Supreme Court refused to remove a 1930s frieze showing Muhammad as lawgiver that decorates the main court chamber; the Council on American-Islamic Relations made an issue of this, leading to riots and injuries in India.
  • 2002 – The American evangelical leader Jerry Falwell calls Muhammad a “terrorist,” leading to church burnings and at least 10 deaths in India.
  • 2005 – An incorrect story in Newsweek, reporting that American interrogators at Guantánamo Bay, “in an attempt to rattle suspects, flushed a Qur’an down a toilet,” is picked up by the famous Pakistani cricketer, Imran Khan, and prompts protests around the Muslim world, leading to at least 15 deaths.
  • February 2006 – The Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten publishes twelve cartoons of Muhammad, spurring a Palestinian Arab imam in Copenhagen, Ahmed Abdel Rahman Abu Laban, to excite Muslim opinion against the Danish government. He succeeds so well, hundreds die, mostly in Nigeria.
  • September 2006 – Pope Benedict XVI quotes a Byzantine emperor’s views that what is new in Islam is “evil and inhuman,” prompting the firebombing of churches and the murder of several Christians.

These six rounds, Pipes says, show a near-doubling in frequency: 8 years between the first and second rounds, then 5, then 3, 1, and ½. Is it because Muslims are more agitated or perhaps because the non-Muslim world does not counter these intimidations tactics and so it further emboldens the Islamists.

The Islamists have a goal with their intimidation. Make the free world think itself into a position of near impotence and impose their Islamic law on the non-Muslim world. Assimilation is not their goal – domination is.

Sign up for my free WEEKLY STORM REPORT and receive a synopsis of the most important weekly news revealing the intimidation, infiltration and disinformation tactics used to soften-up the non-Muslim world for domination

Be Sociable, Share!