Dhimmi and Dhummy alerts. Tony Blair, Bernard Lewis, the WSJ.

The long march of cultural Marxism is now gestating into a sprint. The end of the objectives are near – the complete idiotization of the general culture towards anything of meaning or import. Islam is one primary example of the battle between the reality of the 5 senses and the political/media/educational elite's mendacious, distorted and ignominious re-writing of Islamic history and political theology. The Dhimmis and Dhummis are growing in volume and size and they include some unlikely characters. One time critics of Islam including the Wall Street Journal, Tony Blair, and Bernard Lewis, are now recasting Islam as moderate, kind, generous, and deeply concerned about peace and love. These poseurs simply assume that the 'stupid people' will accept the platitudes as relevant; the lies as facts; and the posing as important. We don't. Many won't. At some point the conflict between the unwashed dirty hoi-polloi and the elites over Islam will erupt. And the elites will lose – along with their Muslim masters.

Tony Blair was interviewed by a German media outlet and came up with this amazing and mentally unbalanced statement about the founder of Islam:

"As well as that, one is interested in other religions. One's motivation is greater. I regularly read the Koran, practically every day," Blair told the interviewer. He said the Prophet Mohammed had been "an enormously civilizing force.
But when asked if he planned to convert to Islam, he smiled and said, "No, let's not start on that," Die Zeit reported...”

So Dear Tony, who was once vilified by the Arabs and Muslims as a 'crusader', is now a middle aged English bloke reading the Koran on a daily basis, profoundly impressed by the civilizing mission of Mohammed which included inter-alia; slave trading, rape, pillage, Jew-hate, war, killing, decapitating helpless Jews, inventing the Koran, and forcing Arabs to prostrate themselves before his family's moon deity Al-Allah. That a boy Tony. Nothing illustrates the demise of Little Britain better, than the complete co-option of the British elite by Arab money and Muslim threats. From Churchill to Blair? How about from King David to Beavis and Butthead?

Tony Blair is not the only Dhimmi on the Dhummy-pro Islam team. One-time Islamic critic Bernard Lewis, regarded by many in times past as a 'sage in Christendom' for his rather obvious conclusion that Islam is a complete and utter failure; wrote in a Wall Street Journal 'symposium' [read grovel to the Muslims]; that Islam IS moderation. How wonderful indeed it must all be Bernie:

“A History of Tolerance
By Bernard Lewis
A form of moderation has been a central part of Islam from the very beginning. True, Muslims are nowhere commanded to love their neighbors, as in the Old Testament, still less their enemies, as in the New Testament. But they are commanded to accept diversity, and this commandment was usually obeyed. The Prophet Muhammad's statement that "difference within my community is part of God's mercy" expressed one of Islam's central ideas, and it is enshrined both in law and usage from the earliest times.
This principle created a level of tolerance among Muslims and coexistence between Muslims and others that was unknown in Christendom until after the triumph of secularism. Diversity was legitimate and accepted. Different juristic schools coexisted, often with significant divergences.
Sectarian differences arose, and sometimes led to conflicts, but these were minor compared with the ferocious wars and persecutions of Christendom. Some events that were commonplace in medieval Europe— like the massacre and expulsion of Jews—were almost unknown in the Muslim world. That is, until modern times.
Occasionally more radical, more violent versions of Islam arose, but their impact was mostly limited. They did not become really important until the modern period when, thanks to a combination of circumstances, such versions of Islamic teachings obtained a massive following among both governments and peoples.
From the start, Muslims have always had a strong sense of their identity and history. Thanks to modern communication, they have become painfully aware of their present state. Some speak of defeat, some of failure. It is the latter who offer the best hope for change.
For the moment, there does not seem to be much prospect of a moderate Islam in the Muslim world. This is partly because in the prevailing atmosphere the expression of moderate ideas can be dangerous—even life-threatening. Radical groups like al Qaeda and the Taliban, the likes of which in earlier times were at most minor and marginal, have acquired a powerful and even a dominant position.
But for Muslims who seek it, the roots are there, both in the theory and practice of their faith and in their early sacred history.” [bold and italics are mine]

I have read every book by Bernard Lewis on the Middle East and Islam. The above statements, with the exception of 'For the moment, there does not seem to be much prospect of a moderate Islam in the Muslim world', are grotesquely inadequate and generalized, but they are indeed, a part of his varied writing career and embedded in his many books. But none of these sentiments were ever displayed as conclusions about Islam in his works. They were merely incidental observations. Is Lewis in his advanced years now making the insane and ridiculous claim that Islam is moderate? Moderate in what? The Koran? Racism? War? Terror? Humiliating non-Muslims? Preventing Christians from building churches in Mecca? Intolerance? His quote from Mohammed who 'revealed' from his moon idol, that diversity was the work of 'God' is utterly mendacious. There is nothing in the Islamic history, the Koran or the Hadiths about Mohammed accepting 'diversity'. There is however early in Islam's development in Mecca, appeals from Mohammed to his Meccan enemies that others must tolerate Islam, for that is what he, or it, the moon idol, wanted. In other words, Mohammed said nothing about tolerating diversity, but simply whined that he wanted the Meccans to leave the Muslims alone, for this is what the moon guy had revealed to him, through the angel Gabriel and which was a part of the moon deity's master plan. This is a singularly different and quite profound variation than the distortion and lie presented by Lewis, a scholar who should know better. When Islam was, or is weak, the Muslims whine, invoke the moon deity and demand that others tolerate the moon cult.

So what is happening? Are these 'experts' such as Blair and Lewis co-opted by Muslim threats of violence, or Arab money into their bank accounts? Are they trying to sell Islam in return for 'financial privileges', and to 'be left alone' in the case of one-time critic Lewis; or to help the 'peace process' which the UN has put into the hands of Blair?  Are they trying to appear 'moderate' and 'centrist' at the end of political and academic careers in order to position themselves for posterity? Do they believe what they say? Or is it all of the above? Perhaps these two men who are quite intelligent, well-read, and very well-traveled, are simply corrupted and deranged from the pop-culture Kool Aid and poison which they may have drunk?

In any event we have a disturbing trend. The Dhimmitude of those in power is in the ascension. Islam is the anti-thesis of the Western world, and its legacy of modernity. You don't tolerate the fascistically intolerant. You don't trust those who lie and deceive. And you certainly should never follow the preaching mendicants who proffer absurdity and irrationality, in the place of the world of the 5 senses. Good bye Bernard Lewis. Farewell Mr. Blair. Your careers are forever besmirched and tainted.