"The United States must check the internal voices of nationalism that are promoting a 'clash of civilizations' with Islam, the head of the Arab League said."
-- from this article
Running scared is the sinister Amr Moussa, for whom the jig seems to be up. For we no longer live in the days when those blue-papered copies of the FBIS (Foreign Broadcast Information Service), so poorly distributed, so hard to find, contained the transcripts of radio and television in the Arab countries. Now we have the Internet, and we have all kinds of translation services, busily giving us what is written in Al-Ahram or a hundred other official or semi-official government papers. We know when anti-American or antisemitic travesties are broadcast, in a ballyhooed and popular series, on television. We can see what Egypt's population is fed, and what it screams from its heart, whenever aloud. Why, it was Frank Gardner, once and future friend of the Arabs, and a BBC correspondent, who reported on the absolute delight of Cairene crowds on the afternoon of September 11 when they heard the good news. Does Amr Moussa not know that? Does he not know that others were reporting from Hamra Street in Beirut (see the Wall Street Journal), others still captured on film the wild delight in Gaza and the "West Bank" (not all the photographers had their film confiscated by the local Arabsa), and in Riyadh, as even Saudis reported, there was much mafeking, honking of horns, Arab equivalents of high-fives, and invitations to suddenly-thrown-together feasts. In this country, too, a nurse overheard the hilarity in the room of an Arab patient at the Mass. General (and she was then hushed up); stories from all over, from Arab communities that could not conceal their glee, until the next day they suddenly realized that they had to assume long faces and express their "outrage" and "grief" (some of those Muslim leaders joining in those interfaith candlelight vigils and so on later were found to have long been expressing quite different sentiments, and continued to do so, for Muslim audiences, when they thought no Infidels were listening, no Infidels were looking, no Infidels were recording.
Amr Moussa is quite wrong. There is no "clash of civilizations." There is Islam against all Infidels. It is Islam against America, and Israel (the Lesser Jihad), but it is also Islam against the Infidels of Western Europe, with their silly laws, and silly customs, and silly understandings, including that ridiculous "freedom of speech" those Danes and others insist on practicing. Despite the most incredible attempt at brainwashing by all the governments and elites, especially in the media, to prevent the peoples of Western Europe -- of Italy and France, of Spain and Belgium, of Denmark and Sweden and Norway, of Germany and Holland, to prevent Infidels from discovering too much about what is written in the Qur'an, and what the Sunnah tells the True Believer to believe, and what that figure of Muhammad, uswa hasana, al-insan al-kamil, means for the wellbeing of Infidels, it cannot be done. It's just not possible to have those texts on-line, everywhere available, and prevent the more intelligent and aware Infidels from looking at those texts, and then from studying the history of Islamic conquest, and subjugation of non-Muslims.
Does Amr Moussa think we haven't all been watching like hawks the assault on the Copts? Does he realize that the days of the Court Copts, silently enduring their mistreatment, are over -- at least over for those Copts who have arrived in the West? Does he realize that we are capable of making the link between the attacks on inoffensive Buddhist monks and teachers and farmers in southern Thailand by Muslims, and the all the other examples of Muslim murderousness against Infidels -- in Nigeria, Sudan, Philippines, in Pakistan and Bangladesh, in Afghanistan and in Iraq (where as the attitudes prompted by Islam return with a vengeance, Christians flee), in the Muslim demands, whipped up by Muslim leaders within Denmark, who had accepted the fantastic generosity of the Danish state, for the Danes to cease to practice freedom of speech and to punish any of their own citizens who insisted on so doing, in Holland, the most self-consciously "tolerant" state in the entire world, that has made a fetish of that "tolerance," and where, without any kind of prompting, and despite every effort made to pretend the problem is not Muslims and not Islam, more than 60% of those famously tolerant Dutch now regard Muslims with alarm -- alarm born of the behavior and attitudes and beliefs of those same Muslims.
No, Amr Moussa doesn't realize that the more he prates about this kind of thing, the more he inflames the Infidels. They have been slow learners. They are still taking their time. But it is not anyone whipping them up. It is they themselves, as they read the daily paper, however sanitized it may be, however confusingly or misleadingly it may present the latest Muslim outrage here, there or everywhere, and that even those who might a few years ago have fallen for those "interfaith" sessions, those Mosque Outreach evenings, those predictably deceptive meetings of special Muslim pleading, and manipulation of useful idiots among the Infidels at those "Muslim-Christian" and "Muslim-Jewish Dialogues" that are exercises always in taqiyya-and-tu-quoque, after the exposure of even the smoothest of sinister operatives, Tariq Ramadan, not only by French Infidel journalists -- Fourest, Favrot), but by debaters on television (Sarkozy, Finkielkraut) who showed him up for all the French to see, and they did see, but also from the truthful Muslims themselves.
The best was the journalist, now bodyguarded in Italy, a commentator on the RAI (state-owned television) and for the leading newspaper, the Corriere della Sera, Magdi Allam. He, like Tariq Ramadan and like Amr Moussa, has his roots in Egypt. He, like Tariq Ramadan and Amr Moussa, was raised as a Muslim. And he, Magdi Allam, completely unlike Tariq Ramadan and Amr Moussa, is in the business not of deceiving Infidels in order to protect and promote Islam and to deprive Infidels of their senses -- "Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?" -- which is what Amr Moussa, in the nonsense and lies peddled in the speech described above, was trying to do -- but of trying to tell the truth.
The deliberate use by Amr Moussa of the word "nationalism" deserves study. All kinds of things are implied by this choice of word:
The idea that only American hyper-patriots could conceivably be wary of, or hostile to, Islam.
The fact that the E.U., which does its best to diminish national sentiments, old-fashioned pride in one's own history, literature, and culture, which weakens the ability of the members of the E.U. to withstand Dawa and demographic conquest.
The fact that Islam is trans-national, deplores the nationalism that divides the umma al-islamiyya, the Umma or Community of Believers, the only community that really counts.
All this and more can be located in the use of that word "nationalism."
The Arabs and Muslims are very careful with how they put things. They never miss a trick. That is why it is so painful to listen to one of those debates between Arabs ("Palestinians") and Israelis, in which every word is loaded on the Arab side (beginning with the words "occupied" and "occupation") while the Israelis blithely ignore, or sometimes even naively accept, the lexicon of the enemy, and in doing so, unwittingly lose the debate in the minds of unwary listeners.