Today's column looks at 24 Oklahoma lawmakers who declined to receive a gift of a personalized, state-seal-stamped Koran from an all-Muslim state advisory body. This is surely a surreal confluence of not church and state, but mosque and state, which, under Islam, are always fused in the system of sharia law--a system  that denies all Western-style human rights.
    So, in refusing the Koran, the legislators weren't simply and churlishly turning down a benign gift. There was a principle involved--namely, that the Koran promulgates an ideology at odds with Western-style liberty. Such a principle, in these PC times, is difficult to get across to people convinced of universalism or afraid of giving "offense" (or both). Of course, given the extreme "offensiveness" of Islamic religious discrimination or the Islamic institution of jihad, such a critique is nonsense. Imagine if the German-American Bund handed out copies of Mein Kampf to state lawmakers, and the ones that refused to accept a copy were labeled anti-Semitic. It’s that nuts.
    But there is more than principle involved in Oklahoma. There is a practical, tangible side to the issue: namely, the Islamization process--a threat to the survival of the West that is greater than terrorism because it is so difficult for an open society to ward off.
    That is, it seems like good, old-fashioned hospitality for the US government to accommodate Islamic holidays, to provide Islamic foods, to accept Islamic clothing and, in this current event's case, to be thankful for gift Korans. But these are the practices that, as Patrick Soohkdeo, director of the Institute for the Study of Islam and Christianity in Great Britain, explains, are part of the Islamization process. He was describing this process, which has already transformed Great Britain beyond recognition for Anglophiles and Masterpiece Theater devotes, in an interview with the blogger Atlas Shrugs at last week's Counter-Jihad Summit in Brussels.
    Here is part of what he said:

    "If you had to deduce their strategy, over the past thirty years, it would be first the creation an Islamic consciousness, in other words the women wear hijab, everyone eats halal meat, those very basic things that give visibility to the Muslim community, they know who they are, and their sharia, their law becomes operative.
    "And secondly, to create organizations within institutions, for example, the Islamic Women's society, an Islamic Leaders society, an Islamic Education society. Now, each of those societies sits down and works out its principles. It says what are our objectives, where do we want to go, how are we going to get there? How does Islam fit within this, and how does our law come in?
    "Once they have that in place, they move to the third stage, which is to say to their local authority, ' that we have got lots of Muslim children in school, should not the school cater for our children, in terms of dress, in terms of Ramadan, in terms of food, in terms of education'? That say politically that, 'we are here, shouldn't we be a part of everything'?
    "So what has happened as they have engaged the political structures at the local ... national level so now that Islam has been accepted and brought into the center."

     I would say we have all three stages well underway in the United States.
    The rest of Atlas Shugs' interview is transcribed here at Tundra Tabloids. (Scroll down a bit to find it, and don't miss the description of the conference even though the MSM did.)
    It was while I was researching the Oklahoma story that I first heard Patrick Sookhdeo's analysis. Unfortunately, it seemed all too apt.