1. Deportation to countries of their origin.Then others added additional answers and took exception to some of the seven:
2. Deportation to Muslim-only towns guarded by the police.
3. One child per family policy reinforced with sterilization.
4. Mandatory lessons about Muslim atrocities.
5. Very strict control of Muslim clergy (mullahs).
6. Tax on Muslims to recompense us for all the harm they have done to us.
7. Sermons (khutbah) and religious instructions must be conducted in the local language, rather than Arabic, so that hate speech can be easily identified.
Blogger Pastorius said, "I think numbers 2 and 3 are fascistic. I think numbers 1, 2, and 3 can be taken care of by our proposed idea that Sharia is Sedition, punishable by death or deportation."
Blogger Citizen Warrior said, "My list would be short. I might say:
1. Deport or arrest anyone advocating Shari'a or jihad. Arrest them for sedition.
2. No more concessions to Islam. Period.
Number seven on the unknown guy's list, however, would help reveal exactly what is being preached in the mosques. So maybe that one too."
Anonymous Anonymous said, "8. Ban cousin-mariage to disrupt their breeding cycle.
9. Ban halal slaughter in Dar al-Harb.
10. Massive child-protection intervention to remove children from abusive Muslim families and have them adopted and brought up as Kaffirs."
Blogger Sabra said, "Amend #3 to say, "One wife per husband with one child per family policy reinforced with sterilization." If you just go with that alone, the problem will solve itself. There can only be so much in-breeding before a species starts to die off, right?
Although I agree quite completely with the whole list - and the others added in comments!"
Anonymous Anonymous said, "Number one addresses the next two suggestions as well as number 5. Eliminate 2 & 3. If followers remain in their own nations and breed beyond survivability - so be it.
Number 4 - Absolutely.
Number 5 - Native reverts should be monitored and hold passport with restricted travel.
Number 6 will fund 1, 4 5 and 7
Number 7 - Affirmative
Most important missing guideline: Sharia is Sedition, punishable by death or deportation (ht Pastorius)."
Blogger Andy Armitage said, "Hard to go with some of these without hammering human rights, and that would have to be the same for everyone. I'm in favour of offering them financial incentives to go to a country of their choice; and I'm in favour of discouraging birth, anyway (probably fiscally), because, Muslims apart, we have too many people on this planet and Muslims and Catholics just want us to add more — exponentially. And that ain't good. But it's one we do have to watch, because they do discourage contraception, I think, and irresponsible breeding is going to raise their numbers (not all their kids will hang onto the old dogmas, but enough of them will).
I think mandatory lessons would be a good idea, not just about atrocities, but about what's called for in the Koran, just to show those whose reading of it may be a bit lax and casual that there are calls in there for kafirs to be killed.
There should, yes, be strict control of imams coming into our respective countries. There seems to be an expectation that, because it's to do with religion, any damned preacher will have no difficulty in getting into the country.
Muslim-only towns would just be another ghetto. Yes, it would be guarded, but the innocent are going to get punished with the guilty.
Perhaps a fundamental thing would be to get religion out of the public square altogether, make it clear that religion — whatever religion — is a private thing.
Blogger Aukmuntr said:
#11- No Teaching Islam in the USA, especially in public schools
#12 - No call to prayers that can be audible over ten feet
#13 - Police cannot automatically say the crime that just occurred is not terrorism without proof within 48 hours
#14 - Mandatory classes in school on Islamic terror, with full video and audio with proper translation...
Blogger Citizen Warrior said, "In an interview, one of my heroes, Rita Katz, who knows a lot about the underbelly of jihad in America, had these suggestions for the answer to Islam's relentless encroachment:
8. Freeze the assets of terrorist financiers and shut down sources of money to terrorist organizations, including their numerous "charity" organizations.
9. Destroy training camps and hamper their ability to train new recruits.
10. Change the general perception of the global threat of Islam's relentless encroachment to America and the West. Change perception from a mere nuisance to a major threat to the free world.
And, Katz added something the U.S. could do outside its borders:
11. Islamic terrorism needs to be studied in depth, and it needs to be addressed as a global, long-term problem. The only way we can win this war is if we, the West, will force countries, governments, and organizations that educate, preach, and fund jihad to stop what they are doing. As long as radical Muslim clerics will preach for jihad, and as long as Saudi textbooks will teach their youngsters that we, the "infidels," will always be their enemies, Islamic terrorism will not be eradicated. Through political pressure, diplomacy, sanctions, and similar measures, the West, spearheaded by the U.S., has to force governments such as that of Saudi Arabia to stop spreading this incitement and to engender a new generation that does not have that blind, vicious hate against the West and everything it represents. And then — in a generation — we will be able to win this war once and for all."
Anonymous Anonymous said, "The Muslims aren't the REAL problem.
Future historians, perhaps some Russian or Chinese Gibbon writing 'The Decline and Fall of the Anglosphere', will have an interesting job explaining how the vigorous post-World War II Anglo-Saxon civilisation, which put men on the moon and invented all of modern computer and telecommunications technologies, somehow lost its confidence to the extent that it allowed itself to be taken over by swarms of Dark-Age savages, with hardly a glimmer of resistance.
We tend to think of the causes of the Muslim problem as being external — Pakistan, Saudi Arabia etc. But the real causes are internal: the self-loathing 'intellectuals', the open-door immigrationists, the Effete Elite such as Cameron and the Archdhimmi, the post-colonialist guilt trippers, the multi-culti dumbing-down educationalists, the anti-British Brainwashing Corporation and all the rest of the smirking-class traitors — not only in Britain but in Canada, Australia and the US as well.
A healthy body can resist attacks by parasites, but Anglo-Saxon civilisation, and indeed the whole of European civilisation is very sick indeed.
To return to my first sentence, why did I write a Russian or Chinese Gibbon rather than an Islamic one? Because if the Anglosphere is destroyed by the Muslims, it will go through a stage where it is so anarchic and weak that stronger, more homogenous and more culturally self-confident civilisations will step in to take charge, and deal with the Muslims in the manner of Joseph Stalin and Chairman Mao."
Blogger BabbaZee said, "I have to think about it." Are you done thinking, BabbaZee?
Commenter Lance Corporal Jack Jones said:
Fixed bayonet, greased with bacon fat. They don't like it up 'em!
Anonymous Anonymous said:
The Army's Totally Serious Mind-Control Project (using "thought helmets)
Now if the military can develop this for battle, why can't we have it designed to erase Islam from the brain of captive Jihadis?
Commenter Revere Rides Again said, "First order of business should be a massive education campaign to inform every member of the public who is willing to listen of the nature of Sharia and Jihad and why they must be treated as sedition, with appropriate penalties.
Islam must be identified as a politico-religious movement intent on conquering Western institutions and installing itself as a theocratic Caliphate. Concessions to Islam must cease, and any encroachments on the law of this land — attacks on freedom of speech, insistence on special treatment, attempts to establish Sharia courts, etc. — must come up against stone walls of opposition. A campaign of education about Islam's impact on women would be welcome as well. So would some sober reflection on the value of rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar's and preserving the secular nature of government.
I don't believe in trying to outbreed a problem that is rooted in philosophy. If the legal constraints coupled with birthrate discrepancies mean that we leave the hordes of Islamists with no outlet but violence, then so be it. Let the violence be dealt with according to Chicago Rules, for as long as it takes for them to get the point or lose the demographic advantage, whichever comes first.
Speaking of which, I'm trying to imagine a billion angry gay Chinese guys and all I can picture is this big chaotic fire drill..."
Blogger Epaminondas said, "Well, let's stick to what's possible and constitutional. That means 1, upon seditious behavior of people who are not citizens, case by case. No mean feat.
The rest are blatantly unconstitutional."
Blogger Always On Watch said, Epa has a valid point about the issue of constitutionality.
Unfortunately, going through the legal system has been less than successful. I recently posted this over at THE ASTUTE BLOGGERS. How well the cases go in court depends a lot on who is sitting on the bench.
As an educator, I'm a strong advocate of truth-filled education as a strong anti-jihad tool.
The big negative: demographics. Now, I'm no advocate of mass sterilization. We've been down the eugenics road before and not only in Nazi Germany.
But our legal system could see to it that polygamy is a no-go and results in deportation.
I favor deportation because our prison system doesn't need a further burden.
And properly vetting immigrants is also essential. No more Wahhabists, including imams.
Mosques and Islamic centers should be thoroughly investigated to see if they are teaching sedition. That's not a violation of freedom of religion at all. In fact, I know a few Moslems who immigrated here, only to discover that the mosques are "radicalized." They no longer attend mosques, BTW, and cherry pick the doctrines of Islam on their own."
Blogger Epaminondas said, "polygamy is a no-go" IT IS, and the courts must be our remedy for those legally in the USA.
Religious freedom was no defense for the radical Mormons.
I will again make the point that if you teach violence, and violence results, YOU and the institution responsible are accountable. That's how the Aryan nation was destroyed.
If my temple through me as a teacher taught that for the final day to arrive and all of us to reach heaven all the Zoroastrians must die, and that the natural world would aid the Jews in this endeavor against the evil ones...and one of my students went out to get those Zoroastrians...the Temple, me and the INDIVIDUALS on the Board every year this was taught would all be liable for civil damages.
Blogger Pastorius said, "Epa says 2-7 are unconstitutional. I say, no I think #5 is not unconstitutional.
What one has to remember is that Islam is not strictly speaking, a religion. It is a virulent political system posing as a religion. it is like Communism.
There is nothing unconstitutional about monitoring the activity of the Communist Party, as it is dedicated to the overthrow of the government.
Likewise, Islam, as it is dedicated to the overthrow of the government of the U.S., ought to be monitored. That means Islamic 'clergy' ought to be monitored."
Blogger Epaminondas said, "Pasto MAY have a point on 5 when the quttbas cross over to non religious issues. I have to think about it some. Bit I have a feeling then, that Jeremiah Wright was close to the line. And so might some critical progressive rabbis I know of. The problem is how to draw such a line which is fair across the board.
Suppose you want to preach against inequality (perceived or real), and urge civil disobedience...is that over the line, and to who? Some future govt that might not be too swift? Suppose it's an executive branch which is topped by Americans who happen to be Muslim, and we have a future Rick Warren preaching against them?
See what I mean?
We can't have laws which pick out one group for RELIGIOUS reasons. However, I think there are oodles of places where the dean seems to require actions which are urging violence, sedition, and govt overthrow (the Muslim Brotherhood of America's 'grand jihad'). It is at that point where our individual freedoms outweigh untrammeled religious freedom."