We have an interesting conundrum.

Islam is supposedly a religion of peace.

Jihadists are supposedly a heretical minority that “hijacked” Islam and doesn’t represent its mainstream.

Jihadists are almost without exception extremely informed about Islamic doctrine. Furthermore, they almost without exception seek guidance from the imams regarding what’s allowed and forbidden; essentially, they seek religious fatwa before their act.

Islamic community is always “persecuted” after a terrorist attack and they always plead innocence. However, after the attack, when the jihadists are identified, it turns out that none of their neighbors knew anything, that nobody in their mosque knew anything, and they are presented as an isolated incident that has no precedent in the community and could never be repeated. Nobody in the Islamic community reports any suspicious activity by the radicals and they complain how the media is portraying them negatively; all the while, the main stream media is bending over backwards to portray Islam in general in a positive light and to avoid making a straightforward connection between Islam and terrorism. Essentially, the only Islamic terrorists are not really Islamic, and they are the only ones; all other Muslims are completely innocent, and all the guilty ones are dead, and they weren’t really Muslims.

After a while, people forget about the terrorist attack, lull themselves into sleep by believing the story above, and things are calm… until the next attack. And again, Islam is innocent, all the Muslims are innocent, the terrorists aren’t really Muslims, and nobody suspected or reported anything.

But some of those innocent hijab-wearing Muslim women were cooking for the terrorists. Someone was cleaning up after them, every day, and saw the guns and bombs. Someone talked to them in the mosque every day. Someone was giving them religious advice and answering their questions.

Everybody knew everything. Everybody knows everything. They are all in on it.

In the light of recent events and my strong reaction to the ideology behind the terrorist attacks, I asked myself a question: “do I hate Muslims?”

I observed my reactions to the testimonies of the converts from Islam to Christianity, and came to the conclusion that my strong negative reaction to Islam and Muslims isn’t directed against the physical vessel – when a Muslim converts to Christianity and experiences a positive change and a spiritual transformation, my reactions change accordingly and I start to feel very positive towards this person, which means there’s nothing even remotely racist in my initial response, because it is directed at software, not hardware.

So, what is it about Islam that provokes such a negative reaction in me, and is it directed uniquely toward Islam? I examined further and decided that I have the same negative reaction toward arrogant, intentionally deceptive liars of any kind. If someone lies and tries to convince others of his lies with the purpose of misleading them and causing their misfortune, suffering and doom, I experience the same surge of hatred toward the deceiver. My reaction to spiritually empty and lost persons is not hatred, but a mixture of frustration, helplessness and apathy, because there are so many of them, and since they are too involved in their illusions, there’s nothing I can do to snap them out of their state. However, when I see a Muslim lie in order to deceive people and lead them into his darkness, or when I see an American State Department spokesperson intentionally lie in order to slander other nations and their leadership in order to justify some war or other kind of evil, I feel a surge of strong anger and hatred toward this person.

The question is, why do I feel this way? The simple answer is, because I hate evil. I feel good when people are pointed towards the right spiritual goal, and their actions reflect contemplation of that goal. This is what I perceive as good: when people absorb the light of God, accept it into themselves and transform it into knowledge, wisdom, and acts of loving kindness. Evil is the opposite: when someone, out of either his personal spiritual emptiness and spiteful misery, or even a demonic influence of some kind, produces acts of evil and darkness, and tries to convert others to his evil.

The question is, what to do if one is to effectively oppose evil ideas and people? To fight them directly can sound like fucking for virginity – it might seem that you simply turn into one of them. However, I gravitate towards st. Augustine’s interpretation of just war: it must be fought when refraining from violence will produce more evil than responding to evil with force. Essentially, if some evil philosophy wants to shroud the world in eternal darkness, this must be opposed with the minimum of force necessary for the good to prevail, and my addition is that the best way to fight it can be a combination of passive and active measures.

I see it like this: like all things, evil needs resources in order to grow. It needs to be fed, and it needs to be unopposed. If an ideology is not intellectually defeated, it will be advertised as superior, and thus gain converts. By gaining converts, it essentially gains resources and eventually rises to a dominant position. When it becomes physically powerful, it might be too late to oppose it with anything less than open war, which is the worst possible solution.

So, what do I propose as a method of fighting Islam? First, it needs to be intellectually exposed as evil. This is very easy to do because it is so obviously evil that every sane person will perceive this instantly with very few arguments: evil permeates its scripture, and its more orthodox adherents are more evil than those who adhere to some loose and selective interpretation of the scripture. Also, it’s quite obvious that converts to Islam are motivated by sociological factors, very much like the cult members or soccer fans, and from the spiritual fulfillment experienced by those who leave Islam in favor of Christianity, it is obviously that Islam lacks the active spiritual component and therefore that it has nothing to do with God. This line of argumentation needs to be very vocally expressed in the media, in order to make it clear to the Muslims that they are wrong. Then, it needs to be made clear to them that there are good alternatives to Islam. They don’t need to remain Muslims, or to perceive Islam as part of their identity. It must be made clear to them that a better, more fulfilling spiritual life is possible if they renounce their false religion that has nothing to do with true God. They need to understand that the true God is not someone who has a fit of madness whenever someone doesn’t worship him with sufficient submission, but that true God is light, knowledge, truth, freedom and spiritual realization, that the true God lies in the direction of Jesus, not in the direction of Allah. People don’t leave Islam because they are spiritually fallen, they leave Islam because Islam is a spiritual prison without light and truth, and they leave it because they desire the light of God. So basically Muslims need to be called to convert from Islam – not to embrace a “moderate” variety of Islam, but to understand that Islam is simply evil and there’s no possible path to God by embracing evil moderately. It needs to be renounced, and they need to embrace the true God, which is of light, truth, knowledge and freedom, which will set them free from bondage and treat them not as slaves, but as friends.

The next thing that needs to be done is to dismantle the infrastructure of the problem. If Muslims were not allowed to parasite on the Western civilization, they would still be in the dark ages. They didn’t invent electricity, nor steam engine, nor internal combustion engine, nor computers, phones, or space and nuclear technology. Other than the explosive suicide vest, I don’t know what they invented, at all, but they are allowed to participate in our civilization, simply because huge natural reservoirs of oil happen to be located in the Middle East, and so we pay them huge amounts of money, which allow them to have financial power in our civilization without actually contributing to it in any meaningful way. So we give them money, and they use this money to finance Islamic primitivism and violence. Furthermore, the concept of welfare state in Europe and America allows the Muslims to live there and collect welfare cheques, which basically means they don’t have to learn the language and to assimilate culturally, which they would have to do if they were forced to integrate economically and socially with the domicile population, and they can afford to have a huge number of children. Basically, this means they can afford to do nothing but socialize with other Muslims and make babies which they bring up to be jihadists. This essentially means that we are forced to pay huge taxes in order to breed jihadists who hate us and see us as something evil that needs to be destroyed as soon as possible; essentially, they see the welfare not as pittance, but as some form of jizya, a tax that the inferior infidels are required to pay to the Muslims, which essentially encourages them to see themselves as the ruling class and us as their servile class.

So, if we are to stop the spread of Islam, it’s actually very simple. We simply need to stop paying for it to spread further. We need to close the tap. Stop any welfare to Muslim immigrants, outlaw the practice of Islam, treat the Mosques the same way we would treat the monuments that glorify Nazism and Hitler, encourage the Muslims to convert from Islam, make it impossible for them to survive if they don’t integrate into the Western society, and if they made too many children to be able to support them, put the children out for adoption into Christian families where they would grow up to be good people, and not good jihadists. Furthermore, forbid foreign investment into the West from Arab oil money, and transition from oil to Thorium molten salt liquid fuel nuclear technology, which can power electric cars and similar devices with no problem. We need to transition away from oil for some time already and this reason is even better than global warming. By buying oil we essentially enriched a primitive medieval society which then proceeded to spread its evil tribal cult across the world, and now we are left with quite a mess for us to clean up.

This analysis, however, assumes that Islam is the only problem and that the West is fine, which is not true. The West is experiencing a deep spiritual identity crisis of its own, which is a part of the problem and the reason why Islam was allowed to spread. The West rejected Christianity and instead embraced some empty materialistic form of moral and intellectual relativism, which is as spiritually empty as Islam, but unlike Islam, it lacks self-confidence in its spiritual darkness. The West first needs to rediscover its roots, and then mop both materialism and Islam back into some dark shithole whence they both crawled up from.

The reason why people are afraid of saying the truth about Islam and Muslims is that they are afraid that the Muslims will, if confronted, wage a world war against them, so it’s better to be conciliatory. This doesn’t work, because it makes the Muslims stronger and you weaker. And why are you afraid of Muslims in a war? If you stop giving them your weapons for oil money, what will they wage wars with? What can they produce, with their Islamic science and Qur’anic technology? Swords? Camels? Dates? What? They shoot at you with weapons produced by you. You invented modern guns, rocket launchers, planes and nuclear bombs. The Muslims have only what you give them in your conciliatory cowardice. They send their jihadists to our universities to learn our science in order to use it against us. They are completely and utterly dependent on the West for science and technology, because Islam is worse than useless in that regard. They are not a relevant enemy unless we actively feed them and arm them. Without our modern cameras and Internet, the jihadists wouldn’t even be able to make their own propaganda. It’s not like they are some advanced off-shoot of Western civilization, like Nazi Germany or Soviet Union, which had no problem with things such as space flight or nuclear technology. If we imposed technological and financial sanctions upon Islamic countries, they would revert to bronze age within two generations. Conversely, when Germany was bombed into stone age at the end of the last world war, it took them two generations to get back to space age.

Let’s see some top products of German technology:

How about Russians?

And some great Arab achievements:

So what the fuck are we afraid of? If we stopped artificially feeding and arming those idiots we could pulverize them within a week. The only reason why they are so arrogant and aggressive is because we intentionally refuse to fight them due to artificial ideological reasons, probably because we associate it with Hitler or whatever. Well, Hitler didn’t invent the difference between good and evil and he especially didn’t invent the concept of opposing evil. I don’t say we should go and exterminate the Muslims; we just need to stop brainfucking ourselves into accepting them as equals. We must clearly understand and state that we are superior, and allow them to take part in our superior civilization only if they leave their primitive religion and customs at the door. You know that part of EULA of most products, where it says that you can’t use the product if you are from Iran or North Korea? Well, we should add a provision that you can’t use the product if you’re a Muslim. Want a smartphone? Make your own. Want an airplane? Make your own. Want a car? Make your own. See how far your great Islam takes you when you try. And no cheating: you can’t use tech and science invented by the infidels – that would be haram. Only halal tech invented by good pious Muslims is permitted.

The funny thing is, we could challenge China, Japan or Russia the same way, and can you even imagine how silly that would sound? To challenge Japan to make their own video camera, China to make its own smartphone, Germany to make its own car or a dishwasher, or Russia to make its own planes and spacecrafts? You see why Islam is inferior? Literally everybody outside of Africa kicks Muslims’ ass at everything, and it’s not because Arabs are genetically retarded or something, it’s because Islam is bad software, and if you fill a human brain with such bad software, you get an incompetent but conceited and evil human.

I’m sick and tired of leftists claiming to know what’s the real Islam and what’s not, and you can see the examples of this everywhere.

Yes, Obama and Hillary will tell us who is a real Muslim, they know what a Muslim is better than ulema of Saudi Arabia. The guys in Saudi Arabia aren’t motivated enough to figure out what real Islam is and how to implement it, but the leftists who have never actually bothered to read Qur’an or the hadith, they know what a real Muslim is and is not, presumably based on the assumption that the true Islam is peaceful and nonviolent because that’s what they would like it to be, and everything that doesn’t match the assumption is evil and comes from an improper understanding of Islam.

Yes, Abu Bakr didn’t understand Mohammed properly when he launched the apostate wars, but Hillary Clinton understands Islam perfectly.

Tell me, what do you think is more likely, that the true Islam is what the Westerners would like it to be, or that it is what is officially practiced in Saudi Arabia?

What’s more likely, that Abu Bakr, who waged the apostate wars, properly understood the will and intent of Mohammed, or that “Islam is peace, there should be no compulsion in religion” guys did?

Allow me to illustrate.

A guy who understands what Islam is.

A guy who has an improper understanding of Islam.