How the Crescent Moon intends to eclipse the Cross part two|
Last issue, I presented the objection of the Western optimist to the Moorish danger that I described. He will say that that danger does not exist. According to him the immense Muslim immigration is not composed mainly of terrorists or violent people. Rather they will gradually be assimilated into European culture, and everything will be fine. This fact, added to the inter-religious dialogue promoted by the Vatican, give my optimist objector the impression that the Moorish danger is nonexistent.
Let me respond to the objection and immunize my reader against the narcotic effect of this position, which is based on a false notion of the Islamic religion. For the followers of Mohammed, every country must be oriented by religious principles. Thus, the jihad, or holy war, is justified to impose the precepts of the Koran on adherents of all other religions.
I offer some facts that explain the Muslim position and speak against the objection of the optimist:
First, many colonies of immigrants, while not directly violent or terrorist, nonetheless are openly opposed to the society that takes them in. Italian writer Vittorio Messori gives two examples of what I asserted in the last issue: "The Turks in Berlin constitute a social problem without a solution. There are entire sections of the city closed in on themselves that support a parallel and hostile culture, with no kind of symbiosis with the German culture. And the Magrebins have done the same thing in Marseilles [France]. The very opposite of integration, their objective is to organize society according to the Koran. Islam is a way of life that annuls any separation between the religious, civil and political reality" (Avvenire, Rome, November 18, 1992).
Second, even though the majority of the governments of Muslim countries cannot be classified as terrorist or violent, there is little or no tolerance for any religion except Islam in most of these countries. Religious persecution of non-Muslims is official in Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Nigeria, Egypt and Indonesia. Further, the so-called fundamentalist Islamic groups act with freedom of movement in Algeria, Sudan, Ethiopia, Burundi, Rwanda, Congo, Yemen, Pakistan and Afghanistan. It seems normal, therefore, that many of the immigrants who come from these countries would have a mentality similar to that of their homelands with respect to other religions and Islam.
Third, the Muslim immigrant normally follows the orientation of his religious leaders. Now, these leaders are those who, in the aforementioned countries, are the principal instigators of religious persecution. An analogous thing could be said about many religious leaders in Western Europe who orient the immigrants. There is nothing that leads one to believe that they, as a whole, have abandoned the precepts of the Koran and adopted the Vatican's inter-religious politics.
I will cite two examples that, in my opinion, are paradigmatic of this. Iman Abdelali Hamdoune of Moselle (France) told his followers: "Do not permit your children to follow the example of the French. They should comport themselves in a totally different manner than the French. Here in France we have to impose ourselves, and impose Islam" (L'Express, Paris, May 16, 1996).
Commenting on the international situation in the '90s, Mohammed Semmache of Nice (France) said: "The 'new crusaders' united to kill our brothers in Bosnia and their blood runs every day. The Chechnya War opposes the confession of the impious and followers of Islam. Servants of God, do not forget our brother combatants, our brothers who take up arms to defend Islam and raise the Islamic banner" (ibid.).
Fourth, recently the fight between the Palestinians and Israelis erupted in a new torrent of violence. An immense majority of Muslims support the Palestinian ideals. Therefore, the Muslim European immigrants also support these ideals. In these conditions, it is quite interesting to hear the teaching of the principal religious authority of Palestine, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and Imam of the Mosque Al-Aqsa, the third most important Islamic religious site. On July 30, 2001 Imam Ekrima Said Sabri granted an interview to Catholic World News. Here are some excerpts:
CWN: What is your opinion of the suicide bombers?
Fifth, the objection of the Western optimist is founded on the "impression" that the immigrants are being assimilated into Western culture. However, what is the value of this impression when we know that some of the Arab pilots who directed the attacks of September 11 also "gave the impression" of being completely adapted to American life? According to reports from the aviation schools that they attended, some of them seemed to have assimilated themselves into American culture and were even considered quite amiable and good humored.
My practical conclusion is that there is no serious basis for optimism affirming that the Muslim immigrants do not support the religious Islamic domination of Europe. Therefore, depending on particular circumstances, the "peaceful invasion" can take another form and support violent actions.
SAID SABRI: These young men who explode themselves for Islamic and national purposes are greater than all others and have sacrificed themselves for a great cause.
CWN: Even if they kill 21 young Israeli civilians in a Tel Aviv nightclub?
SAID SABRI: Even if they kill all Israelis. Anyone who explodes himself in Israel is a great person. They are the most noble of all men, and they are alive in Heaven, in the highest form of Paradise, and God is taking care of them" (CWNews Internet Dispatch, July 31, 2001).
According to the logic of their religion, to fight for the installation of Islam in the entire world is highly praiseworthy. For this reason, the violent actions of some are already admired by the majority of Muslims as acts of heroism, and not as something reprehensible. This is to say that the more than 15 million Muslims who live in Western Europe today provide a formidable potential base of action for the fundamentalist groups who want to promote religious-political insurrections.
Who is the new Oppas of this 'Peaceful Invasion'?
What favored the Muslim invasion we witness today in Europe? In my opinion, the doors of Europe were opened for the Muslims by the Ecumenical Council Vatican II, and they continue to be held open by Catholic religious authorities.
In 1965, Vatican Council II promulgated an official document - the Declaration Nostra aetate - which contain these words about Islam:
"The Church has also a high regard for the Muslims. They worship God, who is one, living and subsistent, merciful and almighty, the Creator of Heaven and earth who has spoken to men. They strive to submit themselves without reserve to the hidden decrees of God, just as Abraham submitted himself to God's plan, to whose faith Muslims eagerly link their own …. Over the centuries many quarrels and dissensions have arisen between Christians and Muslims. The sacred Council now pleads with all to forget the past, and urges that a sincere effort be made to achieve mutual understanding; for the benefit of all men, let them together preserve and promote peace, social justice and moral values" (n.3).
This document represented an "about-face" in the Catholic position, until then characterized by militancy. The new attitude could only serve to benefit the followers of Mohammed. It was after Vatican II that the Islamic "peaceful invasion" in Europe began.
Since Vatican II, the conciliar Popes and Catholic authorities throughout Europe have favored immigration, be it legal or clandestine. I cite only several facts that I consider highly expressive of the direct or indirect support that the Catholic authority has given to favor the Muslim immigration.
In November 1992, the Conference of Italian Bishops sponsored the "National Day of Immigration." They asked all the parishes of Italy to urge their parishioners to give a "generous welcome" to immigrants: "For their yoke is already heavy and begs for relief. Our Lord recounts for us his teaching: 'I had hunger …. I had thirst …. I was a stranger and no one would take me in.' We Christians can not turn our backs on this duty." (Avvenire, November 15, 1992). This norm referred to all the immigrants, but applied principally to the Muslims, who constitute the majority of them. Similar National Days of Immigration have been taking place since then, and they continue to uphold the same argument.
In 1989, two Catholic priests offered their parish churches to the Muslims to carry out their cult. Fr. Mauro Campani, parish priest of the Church of St. Faustino in Modena (Italy), was the first to propose this innovation. The second was Fr. Cesare Lino, parish priest in Mede (Pavia, Italy). The Corriere della Sera gave this report of his experiment: "Every Friday the parish church of Mede is transformed into a small mosque in order to receive those who belong to the Muslim confession. Fr. Cesare Lino, of the Church of Saint Mary of the Angels in Mede, explains the initiative as an explicit consequence of Vatican II" (December 20, 1989).
The trial balloon floated, and throughout Italy churches began to open for the cult of Mohammed. Some time later, Fr. Campani explained that his pioneer initiative came from the stimulus of John Paul II: "The initiative of the 'mosque' in the parish was born in the wake of a meeting with the Pope who came here in June of 1988, met with the immigrants and stimulated us to intensify our works of assistance" (Il Sabato, Rome, March 17, 1990).
To help promote the Day of Immigration of 1996, John Paul II made a strong appeal to give asylum to the illegal immigrants. He applied epithets of "racist" and "xenophobic" to those who did not accept his norms. A news article gave this report: "The condition of legal irregularity does not imply a diminution in the dignity of the migrant," the Pope said. In his message, he asked the faithful to "guard against the birth of forms of neo-racism and xenophobic behavior, which try to make our [immigrant] brothers an expiatory goat of difficult social situations" (Corriere della Sera, November 18, 1996).
In Lent of 1998, in face of a sound reaction that was rising against the danger of the Muslim immigration, he once again intervened energetically in favor of the Islamites, who constitute the majority of the legal and illegal immigrants. A news article reported: "In an eight-page message, John Paul II affirmed that charity for those most in need is something urgent in a world where the 'distancing' between human beings is growing daily. 'This distancing makes itself evident when we confront the problem of the millions of refugees and immigrants and the growing intolerance toward these persons, whose only defect is to seek work and better conditions of life outside of their countries,' the Pontiff said" (O Estado de São Paulo, Brazil, February 19, 1998).
In my opinion, History is repeating itself. The doors of Spain were opened to the Muslims in the 8th century by the Archbishop of Seville, Oppas. This has been repeated, in European proportions, in the last forty years by the principles of the Second Vatican Council and the constant actions of conciliar Popes.
I hope and pray that there is still time to prevent a total conquest of Europe.
The American Muslim Phenomenon
Atila Sinke Guimarães
My American reader can think that this is a serious problem for Europe, which is close to innumerable Muslim countries and, therefore, has more problems regarding the Mohammedan immigration. My reader may think that such problems can be avoided in America by simply cutting or drastically reducing the Arab and Turkish immigration. A solution to the Muslim danger in the United States is not so simple. Let me set some more facts into the panorama.
The 2000 World Almanac of Facts places the number of Muslims in the United States at around 5 ½ million. Islam is the fastest growing religion in the United States, largely because of immigration, and is expected to be the second-largest faith after Christianity by the year 2010 (U.S. News and World Report, July 20, 1998).
In America there is a strong African American movement called Nation of Islam. As the name indicates, it is Muslim. Their aim is to "convert" American blacks to Islam and to claim their total independence from white culture and people. Their doctrine preaches the superiority of the black race. Louis Farrakhan is the leader of the movement. In 1995 Nation of Islam and Farrakhan gained national prominence with the "Million Men March" that took place in Washington. A majority of the participants were black and a large number were Muslims. The movement awakened international interest, and the facts that I transcribe here were furnished by Professor Mattias Gardell of Upsala University (Sweden) in an interview with the Brazilian daily Folha de São Paulo (October 20, 1996).
According to the article "Les dangereuses rélations de Louis Farrakhan" [The Dangerous Relationships of Louis Farrakhan] by Sylvie Kauffmann, published in the Paris newspaper Le Monde (February 26, 1996), when the leader of the Nation of Islam visited Iran on the anniversary of the fundamentalist revolution, Farrakhan declared that
"God will destroy America by the hand of the Muslims. God will not give this honor to Japan or to Europe. It is an honor that He will reserve for the Muslims." One year later in Harlem, Farrakhan declared, "A decree of death has been passed on America. The judgment of God has been rendered and she must be destroyed" (New York Amsterdam News, August 14-20, 1997.
After meeting with Farrakhan, Libyan president Colonel Muammar Kaddafi made this remark about the American head of Nation of Islam: "We are used to facing the United States as a fortress from the outside. Now we are finding a breech to penetrate the country and confront it from within" (Le Monde, ibid.)
Surely these facts should give some food for thought in the days to come…
For past columns by Atila, see Archives of On the BattleLine
November 12-18, 2001
volume 12, no. 156
STANDING WITH THE CHURCH MILITANT
ON THE BATTLELINE