The decision by the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo to stop publishing any further cartoons of the Islamic prophet Muhammed has been described by some as a “cave,” but Pamela Geller said it was something worse – an outright victory for terrorism.
“The jihadists won,” Geller told WND. “We need more cartoons, not fewer. We must stand against this violent intimidation to impose the Shariah.”
The internationally renowned critic of Islamic extremism and author of “Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance,” expects there will be more terrorism as a result of Charlie Hebdo’s decision to back away from criticism of Islam.
“By surrendering, Charlie Hebdo is showing terrorism works,” said Geller, a WND columnist.
However, other protests broke out in Islamic countries denouncing the magazine for its criticism of Islam, and they included hundreds of thousands of people in Pakistan, Turkey and Chechnya. The French government took no action to repeal its own legal prohibitions on “insulting” Muslims, described by one Washington Post contributor as “leading the Western world in a crackdown on free speech.”
Just over a month after the Charlie Hebdo attacks, legendary French actress Brigitte Bardot was placed on trial by the French government for the fifth time for purportedly insulting Muslims and “inciting racial hatred” with her comment, “I am fed up with being under the thumb of this population which is destroying us.”
Such gestures have done nothing to stop acts of Islamic terrorism in the country, as only last month a French man was beheaded and had his body dumped at a chemical company in Grenoble.
The shadow of the terrorist attack at Charlie Hebdo also made it difficult for the magazine to continue operating as fearlessly as it once did. In May, Renald “Luz” Luzier, the only cartoonist at Charlie Hebdo to survive the shooting, quit because the strain of working at the magazine was “too much to bear.” Luzier had previously stated he would no longer draw caricatures of Muhammed because he had grown “tired” of making them.
According to G.M. Davis, the author of “House of War: Islam’s Jihad against the World,” France and the West are engaged in a losing struggle by trying to change Islam into something other than what it is. This is especially true, he says, when it comes to trying to eliminate depictions of the Islamic prophet Muhammed.
“The sensitivity Islam has to depictions, any depictions, any image of Muhammed, is very deep rooted. It goes right back to the core teachings of Islam with respect to idolatry. And there’s a terrible phobia of idolatry or really images of any kind. That’s why when you go into a mosque you really don’t see images.”
Davis, who holds a Ph.D. from Stanford and is director of the documentary “Islam: What the West Needs to Know,” says the Islamic faith has always promoted violence to prevent criticism.
“Islam and its prophet Muhammed himself are extremely sensitive to criticism, or satire,” he observed. “In many ways, what happened at Charlie Hebdo is similar to multiple incidents right out of the life of Muhammed. Once he had the upper hand, Muhammed was quite willing to order people killed for creating ‘insulting’ poetry about him, or making fun of him.”
“The logic of what those gunmen did in Paris in January 2015 is, unfortunately, right out of Orthodox Islam,” Davis said.
Robert Spencer, a critic of militant Islam and author of “The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam and the Crusades,” wrote at his website Jihad Watch: “Charlie Hebdo stood for free speech. Now it is surrendering, and proving yet again that violence and terrorism works – a lesson which will only ensure we will see more violence and terrorism.”
Carl Gallups, a Christian pastor, former law enforcement officer, and author of the upcoming book, “Be Thou Prepared: Equipping the Church for Persecution and Times of Trouble,” warns: “The general rule of thumb is that once you begin to negotiate with bullies (terrorists) or to capitulate your legal rights in order to appease their continued threats – the bully will ultimately demand more because you have proven that he can.
“Yes, I expect this move by Charlie Hebdo will only produce additional similar attacks. If it worked with Charlie Hebdo, they will reason, it will work with others as well.”
Davis expressed amazement at what he sees as the continued blindness of Western leaders to the Islamic threat even after several terrorist attacks.
“When people get killed, it opens the eyes of some people, of course,” he said. “But we’ve had repeated instances of Islamic terrorism for decades. And yet here we are still scratching our heads saying, ‘Where does this come from?’ Even something as horrific as the September 11 attacks didn’t persuade the right people that Islam was a danger.”
However, Davis believes that while the West needs to show it won’t be cowed, he argues that Islam should be confronted through “reasoned discourse” rather than mockery.
To that end, Davis advocates what he calls a “containment” policy that would “not permit Islam to grow indefinitely within the West while endeavoring to keep it from spreading to areas of greater strength abroad.”
Part of this strategy involves what Davis judges to be a more “realistic” analysis of American capabilities to “change the face of the Muslim world.”
Pointing to Afghanistan, Iraq, Egypt and Syria, Davis warns Americans, “We keep getting burned, and the situation keeps getting worse. The idea of democratizing the Islamic world, as we understand it, is virtually a contradiction in terms.”
Davis suggests the Charlie Hebdo episode is further proof Islam is impervious to Western cultural norms and should be treated differently than other religions.
“Islam is not a private affair; it’s a public program for transforming a society,” he stated. “It’s analogous to communism. We recognized during the Cold War that Communism wasn’t simply another political choice that could coexist in a pluralistic democracy. It was subversive of that democracy, and that’s why it need to be contained at home and abroad.
“We need to reconsider our immigration policy. I don’t think an outright ban is the right thing. I think we should remain open to those who come in good faith. But I don’t think we should allow Islam to grow institutionally, especially when it is overwhelmingly funded with foreign money from nations like Saudi Arabia. Islam is a political ideology that cannot be extended the same rights as other religions as we understand them.”
Nonetheless, Pamela Geller’s advice on how to confront militant Islam is more direct.
“Draw more cartoons,” she said. “Show that we won’t be bullied into silence. Every mainstream media outlet should be running the cartoons.”