You are here

Daniel Pipes

  • Summary: 

    We see jihad take two forms, based on the relative strength of the Muslim population in an area. Where non-Muslims rule, the attempt is to gain control over the levers of power, and to be in charge. The aim is to overthrow kafir rule. There is no direct attempt to convert, but the war is a war for territory. Where Muslims rule, the aim is to apply Shari'a in its entirety. The hope or end state is for a pious, just, ruler who can make Muslims strong and rich and who can end their divisions. The end state of both is however a global caliphate. The Caliph rules over all the peoples of the world and implements Shari'a law in its entirety.

  • Summary: 

    Some organizations also express a hope that one day Muslims will take over in the United States. The International Institute of Islamic Thought in Herndon, Virginia, aims for nothing less than "the Islamization of the humanities and the social sciences." Just one month after the Sept. 11 atrocities, a delegate at the American Muslim Alliance convention, held in San Jose, announced: "By the year 2020, we should have an American Muslim president of the United States." While there is no reason to suppose that the aspiration to replace the Constitution with Islamic law will succeed, the fact that this represents a not insignificant body of opinion has major implications. It means that the existing order - religious freedom, secularism, women's rights - can no longer be taken for granted. It now needs to be fought for.

  • Author(s):


    This passage raises several questions of translating extreme vetting in practice: How does one distinguish foreigners who "do not bear hostile attitudes toward it and its founding principles" from those who do? How do government officials figure out "those who would place violent ideologies over American law"? More specifically, given that the new procedures  the fear of allowing more Islamists into the country, how does one identify them?


  • Summary: 

    In his book "Negation in India" Famous Belgian historian Koenraad Elst wrote:

    The Blitzkrieg of the Muslim armies in the first decades after the birth of their religion had such enduring results precisely because the Pagan populations in West- and Central-Asia had no choice (except death) but to convert. Whatever the converts' own resentment, their children grew up as Muslims and gradually identified with this religion. Within a few generations the initial resistance against these forcible converions was forgotten, and these areas became heidenfrei (free from Pagans, cfr. judenfrei).

Subscribe to Daniel Pipes