UK "We should not tolerate the preachers of jihad"

Richard Perle inches closer to the truth in this Telegraph article but doesn't quite hit the bullseye.

In his book Who Killed Daniel Pearl?, Bernard-Henri Levy recounts young Omar's reaction to the suggestion that he go to Afghanistan for training. He imagines him thinking "…he has to finish his studies… and his father is still the one who decides everything." "We'll talk to your father," he is told by the Islamist he meets in Bosnia. "I'll organise a meeting for him with Maulana Ismail, imam of the Clifton mosque, a holy man, who is experienced at guiding young English Muslims to our places in Afghanistan and who will find the words to convince him, I'm sure. It's an honour for a family to have a son who abandons his useless studies to consecrate himself to the life of jihad."

Thus was a bright student from a good family lured into a holy war that aims to impose Islamist fundamentalism on the world.

The Sunday Times reports "At least eight suspects worshipped at the Masjid-E-Umer mosque regularly, three of whom were well known to those that run it."

And let's not Finsbury Park mosque, which produced so many terrorists and would be terrorists.

We are constantly being bombarded with the idea that these Muslim terrorists have been "lured" or "brainwashed". The question that no one seems to want to ask, the one that screams out from these reports, is how is it that these Muslim adults, many university educated, can be so easily lured or brainwashed? Are these people trying to say that Muslims are some how more susceptible to recruitment to carry out acts of terrorism? I'd say yes. Why?

Because from birth, at home, in schools and in the mosque Muslims are taught that us infidels are inferior, that Christians and Jews are apes and pigs. In short, Muslims are conditioned from birth and are not lured or brainwashed later on. In a rare BBC report critical of Muslims, "A Question of Leadership", John Ware interviewed Muslims who attest to the fact that they were raised that way - that it was ok to lie to us infidels and to not take us a friends. Here are a few videos that prove the point.

Undercover operations in mosques and inside Muslim communities prove the same point.

This is why it is so easy to recruit Muslims to jihad. The hard part, till now, has been getting them to blow themselves up. That seems to be changing.

So, when Perle says "We should not tolerate the preachers of jihad", he should be referring to Islam itself.

Perle continues with the idea and it never occurs to him to ask the obvious question.

By what concept of liberal democracy must we allow these clerics who are out to destroy us the opportunity to reach impressionable young people with their message of holy war?

Why are they so impressionable and receptive to joining jihad against us infidels? Because they have been raised that way. Watch the videos.

Perle goes on to mention the British and American governments are talking to the wrong Muslims. In Britain the government listens to the MAB and MCB, despite the clear links to terror support from both groups. Likewise, in America the government listens to CAIR, despite its clear links to terrorism. Why? Beats the hell out of me. But the result is, any Muslim that dared to speak out against Islam or call for its reformation, is silenced.

Perle's right about this.

On both sides of the Atlantic we need to abandon the illusion that extremist leaders are authentic and less voluble moderates are not. Talk to the latter - and keep a close watch on the former.

And we need to hold Muslims accountable for their problem.

We also must continue to combat the left wing media who continue to promote Muslims as victims.