After the attack -- which killed one, and wounded three policemen -- in Copenhagen, where Lars Wilks was present at a meeting about free speech,"European Council President Donald Tusk called the attack "another brutal terrorist attack targeted at our fundamental values and freedoms, including the freedom of expression."

If people believe that the Qur'an in the immutable uncreated Word of God, if they believe that Muhammad was the Perfect Man ("al-insan al-kamil") and the Model of Conduct ("uswa hasana") for all time, and that his words and deeds, as recorded in the Hadith, are to be taken as a guide for the conduct of all Muslims, and for their attitudes and behavior toward non-Muslims, and if Muslims support the Shari'a, the codification into law of what Islam inculcates, then it is clear that Muslims, those who take Islam seriously and are not merely Muslim-for-identification-purposes-only Muslims, do not accept the "fundamental values and freedoms, including the freedom of expression" that are part of, possibly the heart of, the advanced West.

Why then should the peoples and governments of the advanced West, that have taken so long to learn about Islam but have now, I think, done so sufficiently as to have all of their worst fears confirmed, continue to pretend that there is any possibility of gettring Muslims to accept, to share, the "fundamental values and freedoms, including the freedom of expression," that make the West the West?

Freedom of conscience, including the perfect freedom to abandon a faith altogether, is not part of Islam. Freedom of expression is not part of Islam, if that includes the ability to subjeect Islam, and the figure of Muhammad, to critcial analysis. Legal equality of men and women is not part of Islam. Freedom of thought is not part of Islam. The legitimacy of a government being based on the will expressed by the people, however imperfectly, in elections, (rather than the will of Allah, as expressed in the Qur'an and glossed by the Sunnah and made manifest in adherence to the Shari'a), is not part of Islam.

What is it in the advanced West that could possibly be accepted by the true believer in Islam? Nothing -- nothing except the free housing, free medical care, free education, family allowances, and many possibilities for helping oneself, and all one's fellow Muslims, to the riches that the Infidels possess and that, by right, as a kind of pre-emptive Jizyah, may be taken, by whatever means prove available, by those Muslims. And as for the Infidel women -- they are fair game, they are asking for it, they deserve what Muslims, singly or in gangs, give them.

The atmospherics of Islam -- full of so much violence and aggression -- helps to explain the violence and aggression of Muslim societies, held in check only by despots with their mukhhabarat and their interlocking groups of security services. But in the West, we don't have the willingness to use the kind of force that would be necessary to hold Muslims in check, and even though the prisons of Western Europpe are full of Muslims, their numbers in prison out of all proportion to their numbers in society, there are still so many out of prison, threatening and making life miserable for so many non-Muslims, on the streets, in the schools, in the hospitals, everywhere. How long must the indigenous, ill-led, for so long so dangerously misinformed about Islam by members of the political and media elites, have to endure this?

At the very least, now is certainly the time, and circumstances offer every excuse, to put an end to Muslim immigration from outside, and to refuse, within the natiions of Europe, to take in Muslims from fellow members of Schengenland.

And the reason given, as outlined above, is irrefutable: no people need to admit into their midst those who "do not share their fundamental values."