Pied Piper Tony

Tony Blair: older but not wiser

Tony Blair is a deceiver.

But as Horatio says to Hamlet:

“There needs no ghost, my lord, come from the grave to tell us this.”

Fair enough. It’s hardly news.

But judging by the reception of his latest steaming offering its seems that Blairshit is mainstream.

The statesman’s latest contribution to the debate on international terror came in the form of an Observer article. The Guardian summed up his piece with the following headline:

Extremist religion is at root of 21st-century wars, says Tony Blair

The article begins with what he calls the “ghastly roll call” of countries suffering terror attacks:

“Syria, Libya, Iraq and Lebanon, as well as Egypt, Yemen, Tunisia and Pakistan. Also suffering are places where we have only in recent years seen such violence: Nigeria, and in many parts of central Africa, in Russia and across central Asia, and in Burma, Thailand and the Philippines.”

He then points out that all these atrocities have something in common:

“the acts of terrorism are perpetrated by people motivated by an abuse of religion. It is a perversion of faith.”

And he makes it clear that he’s referring to extremists of all religions. 

In fact, of course, all the conflicts in the countries listed have something else in common.  They are all places where Muslims are either killing each other or somebody else.

So it’s not a problem of “extremist religion” but “an extremist religion”: Islam.

This is obvious and Blair knows it. Without Islamic terror in the equation, religious extremism would be of mainly historical interest and when we saw a manifestation of it in the modern world we would probably find it almost quaint. Without Islam.

So why does Blair pretend to believe something so obviously and laughably false?

And much more importantly, why did just about every weighty commentator across the spectrum nod their head in unison at the sagacity of Blair’s observation that extremists from all religions are now the main cause of conflict.

The thought process probably goes something like this. With something like a billion and a half Muslims in the world the implications of taking on Islam are just too horrific to contemplate. Much better by far to pretend that they are with us against a few hotheads and hope for the best.

And in the wake of two failed interventions in the Muslim world and with an appeaser in the White House, Blair’s thinking is now in effect the policy of the West.

More specifically Blair’s strategy of pretending that Islam is okay and that the 22,396 deadly attacks recorded since 9/11 are somehow an aberration is that it denies us our greatest weapon in the fight against “extremists”.

And by greatest weapon, I am not referring to the West’s vast military superiority. If the interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq prove anything it’s that our military edge is worth nothing without the will to fight. And the will to fight requires recognising and treating the enemy like an enemy till they give up.

Through decadence and squeamishness we are totally unable to do that.

Therefore in the struggle with Islam we need to rely on our primary weapon:  freedom of speech.

There has never been a belief system more in need of the freedom of speech treatment than Islam. Because of the nature of their societies the vast majority of Muslims are unaware that Islam itself is the cause of their misery.

How long will the half of the Muslim world that is women tolerate being treated like chattels when they are exposed to Oprah?

How will faith in the Koran, which is supposed to be the perfect unalterable word of God, survive the mocking of its many ridiculous passages?

How long will their certainty of being "The Just" hold up against being bluntly told what the rest of us think of their religiously inspired atrocities?

If you doubt the power of freedom of speech, look what it’s done to the Christian church. As one British commentator observed, if you banned women over 50 the Anglican Church would already be dead.

Islam only appears strong because of how brutally it deals with any dissent. But it’s a brittle strength that relies on faith in the absurd.

This is why Muslims react so violently to criticism and the mocking of their religion. And why they are pushing the West so hard  to sacrifice freedom of speech with their demands for a worldwide blasphemy law.

As for the likely objections to the policy of destructive criticism.

It will upset them...

But how much more upset could they really get?

It will lead to more terrorist outrages...

But far fewer will be killed in that terrorism than in the only alternative: military conflict.

It will kill off a vibrant culture...

Yes, just like Islam annihilated the former Christian Middle East, Zoroastrianism of Persia and Buddhism over much of its former range.

Blair’s unwillingness to tell the truth about Islam is shared by just about every western leader and influential commentator. But the only outcome to their endless cowardly accommodations with Islam will be dhimmitude for us all.

The best possible result of pussyfooting around with Islam is that we in the free world all end up living in something like Malaysia where the Hindus and Chinese are tolerated and allowed to pay for everything just so long as they keep their heads down and their mouths shut.

If we love living in free societies we must confront Islam now. Not with bombs and bullets; Islam is a bit like the alien threat in Star Trek, The Motion Picture. The more you hit it the stronger it gets.

What we have to do is fight on a terrain that will play to our strengths, in the free marketplace of ideas.

Victory guaranteed.