Wow, it's been nearly ten days since I last posted. One of the reasons I created this blog was to have a place to post every day, without worrying about making elaborate posts (since that would become too much daily work).

On the other hand, I don't want to feel obligated to post on some kind of relentless schedule, either.

Anywho, today's post concerns one of the many submemes of the Counter-Jihad Mainstream (and/or the tertiary "Problem of the Problem of the Problem") -- namely, the stubborn inability to arrive at the conclusion of what I have called rational prejudice.  And what is this conclusion, Pepe, you might ask...?  It is the conclusion that we cannot trust any Muslim, under any circumstance; and though there might well be localized circumstances for the time being where it doesn't matter whether or not we decide to trust a given Muslim, the principle should be borne in mind and cultivated for the macro level of protecting our society in the long-term from the stealth jihad.

Or as our old friend "The Big W" put it recently in a Jihad Watch comments field with his characteristically brutal succinctness:

Why is it so freaking hard to TRUST NO MUSLIM NO MATTER WHAT?

Big W's entire comment (of which the above was the punch line) was in response to one of the Jihad Watch comments veterans from way back, one "Wellington" (with whom I've had many a run-in over the years).  Wellington just couldn't control himself and had to lodge a comment in which he expressed his cautious trust of a major Muslim, the "senior member of the world’s biggest Muslim organisation" of Indonesia, named Yahya Cholil Staquf.  The reason Wellington felt moved to generously accord this particular Muslim with his grudging trust was because this particular Muslim, Yahya, said things like:

“The truth, we recognise, is that jihadist doctrine, goals and strategy can be traced to specific tenets of orthodox, authoritative Islam and its historic practice.”

And also this particular Muslim, Yahya, stated that the All-Party Parliamentary Group on British Muslims was wrong to link the word “Islamophobia” to racism...

 So, like a rube who's been unduly impressed by the slick soap oil of a smarmily seedy used car salesman, Wellington wrote about this particular Muslim, Yahya:

“This guy seems to be stating matters without any deception.”

The full response to this from Big W follows:

“This guy seems to be stating matters without any deception. ” Only problem is, Yahya ain’t explained how he can still be a Muslim without all that stuff (“orthodoxy” lol) that he’s supposedly saying is bad. And seems we should know by now that he CAN’T explain it. At least I know it fro criminy’s sake. Yahya don’t look like an idiot. What he’s got up his sleeve I’d bet is to fool people like Wellington. And looks like it worked. 

Patti Labelle up above [referring to a commenter named "lebel" who frequently pesters Jihad Watchers about their supposed paranoia about Muslims] is daring y’all to say what I just said, and y’all’s too chicken. Why is it so freaking hard to TRUST NO MUSLIM NO MATTER WHAT?

Now, if Wellington were to counter that he only said that this particular Muslim, Yahya, seems to be stating matters without any deception; the problem with that is that it would tend to demonstrate Wellington's unsophisticated grasp of the various levels and facets of the jihad, including of course taqiyya deception, and the phenomenon of what I have called the "Better Cop" Muslim (also see this Google page).  The "Better Cop" Muslim's whole schtick is to seem to be criticizing his own Islam and to be "feeling our pain" about the whole problem far more daringly than most Muslims; and the primary purpose of this schtick is not to fool the broader Western Mainstream (already readily fooled by the standard-issue garden-variety "Islam is a religion of peace! We are against terrorism! We love Coca-Cola!" Muslims of the "Good Cop" persuasion) -- but rather, precisely, to fool the still minuscule, but growing (albeit at a snail's pace) Counter-Jihad.

To fool them into what, one may ask?  To fool them -- or, rather, to lull them -- into reinforcing their already existing, semi-consciously anxious disinclination to cultivate a ruthlessly rational prejudice against all Muslims.  As long as that disinclination can be regularly massaged and reinforced, the stealth jihadists have a chance to forestall the development of sufficient distrust of Muslims, in the one area of the West where it has the greatest chance of developing (i.e., the "Counter-Jihad", such as it is), which would be perhaps the only way that the ultimate desideratum of Muslims following their Islam (viz., that the entire Earth submit to Allah and His Prophet either by converting to Islam or by submitting to the supreme rule of Muslims) would be frustrated, if not defeated.