What stores will your book be available for purchase? Thank you.

Andrew Sellers

I greatly enjoyed your posts on Dinesh D’Souza. I have some questions regarding the subject of how best to deal with Islamic terrorism. I’ll jump in:

Some of the better Conservative commentators argue that the enemy is not “Islamic Fascism” or “Radical Islam” or “Islamic Totalitarianism” but simply Islam. After reading a number of books on the history of Islam and the Koran itself I am very sympathetic with this view. The Islamic holy texts give a divine mandate to Muslims for essentially world domination. The entire history of Islam has been the history of conquest and subjugation of non-Muslims. Simply put, the Koran is the most hate filled book I have ever read and I tend to think of Mohamed as a religious Hitler. (I say all this as an Objectivist and not a Christian apologist.) Do you agree with this and if true how should America wage war with a religion? Can it even be done?

I tend to think that at some point in the future some Western power will have to wage a massive destructive war against essentially the entire Middle East and that it may be necessary to destroy Muslim holy spots like Mecca and Medina. In short, if things get bad enough the West vs Muslim conflict could take a massive death toll. But if the point of war is to break your enemies’ will then it makes sense that at some point the will of the entire Muslim world will need to be broken and the Jihad impulse will need to be ended once and for all. Would you agree with this or would you say it is too extreme (a point I am open to)?

Lastly, anti-Jihad Conservatives also argue that a key strategy in the war against Islam (which is how they state it – and I must admit that I like that better than the “war against Islamic Totalitarianism” although I think the “war against “Sharia Islam” is a good term too) is to either limit or outright ban Islamic immigration. They will say that letting Muslims into the West, especially now that they are so radicalized, is suicide. They also argue that open immigration is one reason why a libertarian society could never defend itself (they of course include Objectivists with Libertarians). I am an Objectivist for over a decade and I must admit I have always had problems with the open immigration positions of many Objectivists and I do have some sympathy with the suggestion of banning Muslim immigration, at least until such time as Islam is pacified – however long that may be. How would you respond to Conservatives that make these anti-Muslim-immigration arguments and say that without preventing the enemy from entering our lands no war effort against Islam can be taken seriously?

Thanks in advance.

Cord Raeside