The ‘Baby Muhammad’ Jihad: Europe’s Future Nightmare
by Raymond Ibrahim
If Muhammad cannot
beat the infidels on the battlefield, he’ll outbreed them—literally: “Mohammed
most popular name for newborn boys in the Netherlands for second year in a
row,” is the title of a recent report. Muhammad is
apparently also the most popular
name in England. In fact, Muhammad is one of the most popular
names throughout
Northwest Europe. While this may seem innocuous enough—what’s in a
name?—the fact is many Muslims see their offspring as their contribution to the
jihad—the “struggle” to make Islam supreme—since more numbers equate more
influence and power. Nor is the naming of “Muhammad” a coincidence
but rather a cryptic reminder from the parents (usually father) concerning whom
they most revere and hope their sons emulate—namely, the founder of
Islam/jihad.
Although the
original, historic jihad was straightforward warfare on the infidel to make
Islam supreme, the ulema articulated a variety of other
jihads, all of which work to the same end: as with jihad al-lisan (literally tongue,
meaning propaganda, apologias, polemics, etc.), jihad al-mal(monetarily
or materially supporting jihadis, including through zakat), jihad
al-wilada (or childbearing) is seen as a way to contribute to the
“struggle” to make Islam supreme. This can be achieved with either infidel or
Muslim women. As an example of the first, a Muslim imam was
videotaped saying that,
because European men lack virility, their women seek fertility among Muslim
men. Accordingly, “We will give them fertility! We will breed children
with them, because we will conquer their countries! Whether you like it
or not, you Germans, Americans, French, and Italians and all those akin to you
[Western people]—take in the refugees. For soon we will call them [and
their European born sons] in the name of the coming caliphate! And we
will say to you, ‘These are our sons.’”
That some Muslim men
operate along this logic is evident. The diary of Patrick Kabele, an
African Muslim man who was living and arrested in Britain for trying to join
the Islamic State—his primary motive being to purchase a nine-year-old sex
slave—had references that only likeminded Muslims would understand: in an
effort, as the aforementioned imam said, to use European women as incubators
and “breed children with them,” Kabele noted that
he had been “seeding some women over here, UK white,” adding, “I
dont [sic] kiss anymore.” (Unlike straightforward mating, kissing
is deemed an intimate act, and Muslims, in keeping with the doctrine of al-wala’ wa
al-bara must never be intimate with, certainly not love,
non-Muslims—even when
married to them—though they can have carnal relations with them.)
Even so, Muslim women
remain the primary incubators for the jihad—and many of them see it as their
obligation. A Christian Eritrean volunteer and translator who
worked in migrant centers in Germany and was often assumed to be Muslim by the
migrants, confessed last
year that “Muslim migrants often confide in her and tell her about their
dislike towards Christians,” and that “a number of the Muslim migrants she has
spoken to have revealed a hatred for Christians and are determined to destroy
the religion.” How they plan on doing this is telling: “Some women told me, ‘We
will multiply our numbers. We must have more children than the Christians
because it’s the only way we can destroy them here.’” The notion that more
Muslim births mean more Muslim power is so ingrained among Muslims that
recommendations of “family planning” in West Africa—which, despite its scarcity
of resources, has the highest birthrate in the world—is regularly seen by
Muslims as a Western conspiracy. “The West’s policy is about reducing our
numbers,” said Hassane
Seck, an imam from Senegal. “Because of their perverse promotion of
contraception, women in Europe are no longer fertile, but ours are. There are
going to be many more of us, and they’re afraid.”
The report adds that
he and other “imams cite a passage in the Koran imploring Muslims to ‘go forth
and multiply,’ and family planning is seen by many in the region as a Western
plot to curb the spread of Islam.” Little wonder that one of every
three people on earth are expected to be Muslim by 2070. “We
have 50 million Muslims in Europe,” Muammar Gaddafi claimed back
in 2006, more realistically adding, “There are signs that Allah will grant
Islam victory in Europe—without swords, without guns, without conquest—will
turn it into a Muslim continent within a few decades.” Ongoing polls and
reports suggest this long cherished Muslim dream may not be so farfetched.
One recent Pew
report says that
the Muslim population of Europe could triple by 2050—just when all those baby
Muhammads are coming of age, and when the imams will “call” on them. In
Germany alone, nearly 20 percent of the population could be Muslim by 2050;
considering that the average Muslim man is more zealous over his way of and
purpose in (Islamic) life than the average German male, 20 percent is not too
little for an Islamic takeover of—or at least mass havoc in—Germany. Yet
the report also finds that even “if all migration into Europe were
to immediately and permanently stop” and due to significantly higher Muslim
birthrates, Europe’s Muslim population will still grow significantly, to about
36 million, almost double the current population.
Not that many Western
Europeans seem to care; some are even glad to see their own kind die off and be
replaced by Muslims—such as Dr. Stefanie von Berg, who exulted before the
German parliament: “Mrs. President, ladies and gentlemen. Our society will
change. Our city will change radically. I hold that in 20, 30 years there will
no longer be a [German] majority in our city. …. And I want to make it very
clear, especially towards those right wingers: This is a good
thing!” Meanwhile, “the head of Germany’s domestic intelligence
agency is lobbying for a repeal of laws restricting security surveillance of
minors under the age of 14, arguing that the country is facing grave risks from
what the German media dubs ‘kindergarten
jihadists.’”
From here one
understands the true root of the immediate problem—and, as usual, it is not so
much Muslims as it is perverse Westerners. After all, Muslims being
fertile and procreating—traditionally seen in the West as a “blessing”—is not
intrinsically blameworthy. Conversely, Westerners who push for
“multiculturalism,” encourage their female population to incubate future,
homegrown jihadis, and take in and support vast numbers of Muslim men, their
many wives and even more children in tow, are to blame. Islam is not
invading and taking over by the edge of the sword as it once did; Westerners
are doing everything to enable it, to their own detriment.
Such are the signs of
the times: a moribund culture—typified by nihilism, hedonism, cynicism, and
perhaps most tellingly, dropping birth rates—simply has little to live for and
gives way to a more zealous one, just as Anglo-French historian Hilaire Belloc
(b.1870) predicted nearly a century ago: “The recrudescence of Islam, the
possibility of that terror under which we lived for centuries reappearing, and
of our civilization again fighting for its life against what was its chief
enemy for a thousand years, seems fantastic,” he wrote, before explaining:
Cultures spring
from religions; ultimately the vital force which maintains any culture is its
philosophy, its attitude toward the universe; the decay of a religion involves
the decay of the culture corresponding to it—we see that most clearly in the
breakdown of Christendom today. […] In Islam there has been no such dissolution
of ancestral doctrine—or, at any rate, nothing corresponding to the universal
break-up of religion in Europe. The whole spiritual strength of Islam is still
present in the masses of Syria and Anatolia, of the East Asian mountains, of
Arabia, Egypt and North Africa. The final fruit of this tenacity, the
second period of Islamic power, may be delayed—but I doubt whether it can be
permanently postponed.
No comments:
Post a Comment