Posted on 06/24/2013 7:46:28 AM PDT by IbJensen
It’s high time we awakened from the dream that Islamic moderates will save the day.
In an important article for FrontPage Magazine, “recovered” Muslim Bosch Fawstin acknowledges that “Muslims who take Islam seriously are at war with us and Muslims who don’t aren’t. But,” he continues, “that doesn’t mean we should consider these reluctant Muslims allies against Jihad…they give the enemy cover..indifferen[t] about the evil being committed in the name of their religion…prov[ing] in their silence and inaction against jihad that they are not on our side either.” Whether they know it or not, or whether they are merely indifferent to the activities of the “radical” wing of the religion they profess, or whether some — a very few — are doctrinally committed to the reinterpretation of the canonical literature, “moderates” in their adherence to traditional dogma or even in their obliviousness to the axioms of Islamic orthodoxy are the sine qua non for the perpetuation of Islam as understood and pursued by those who would subjugate the liberal West to their totalitarian creed. And the latter’s understanding of the faith is correct, as David Hayden methodically shows in his masterful Muhammad and the Birth of Islamic Supremacism, a must-read for Muslims and non-Muslims alike. Islam is jihad. There is nothing moderate about it.
We might say, metaphorically, that “moderate” Muslims resemble the innocent and unwitting carriers of a deadly virus. They have not deliberately caused the epidemic of Jihaditis from which millions of their fellows suffer, but they allow it to spread unchecked if they do not recognize the affliction and seek appropriate treatment. For Islam itself is the pretext and warrant for both overt violence against and covert subversion of Western cultural and institutional life, and there is no Islam without the sustaining habitat provided by the moderates. It is in this sense that moderation is complicit with extremism, the former supplying the empirical ground in which the latter can take root. The one is dependent on the other for its viability, substance, and effect. Put plainly, there is no jihadi violence (al-Qaeda, etc.) or internal sabotage (Muslim Brotherhood) without Islam, and there is no Islam without the enveloping milieu afforded by the vast community of believers, nominal or otherwise. “The nature of the problem,” writes British lawyer Gavin Boby, who directs the Law and Freedom Foundation, “may be doctrine rather than people, but the harsh fact is that doctrines are sustained by people” (personal communication). The logic is unassailable; regrettably, “moderate” Muslims are impervious to it.
There is a temptation to regard “moderate” Muslims of a special stamp — namely those whom Fawstin calls the “very rare Muslim[s] who help us against Jihad” — as contemporary Mu’tazilites and heroes of a reforming faith, who see themselves as allies of the democratic West. The Mu’tazilites were the eighth-and-ninth century sect thought to have struggled for the primacy of reason, freedom of the will, and the value of the individual, and their legacy has been revived by certain Islamic philosophers. The Iranian scholarly dissident Abdolkarim Soroush, for example, who has been called the Martin Luther of Islam, describes himself as a “Neo-Mu’tazilite,” stressing that “the rationality of their school is extremely valuable” and can “bring new gains [in] using tradition and…extricating ourselves from tradition.”
However, Andy Bostom, erudite scholar of Islam and respected friend, has taken issue with this characterization. The Mu’tazilites, for all their relatively advanced thinking, were a truly nasty bunch and acted as a mihna or an Islamic inquisition against their opponents. Citing the doyen of Islamic studies Ignaz Goldziher, Bostom writes “the Mu’tazilites’ own orthodoxy was accompanied by fanatical intolerance” and “advocated jihad in all realms where their doctrine was not ascendant” (Sharia versus Freedom, Chapter 30, “Mutazilite Fantasies,” pp. 383-389).
It is tempting to see the minim of Islamic reformers as the Mu’tazilites of our time. But Bostom’s research reminds us that in the history of Islam, even the so-called enlightened reformers were zealous and bloody-minded — a fact that we should keep in mind in our search for Muslim confederates today. Perhaps more to the point, such “enlightened” Muslims, even if they are, or appear, comparatively benign and staunch votaries of reason, are acting against their own religion, repudiating aspects of the faith they find troubling or unacceptable yet nonetheless maintaining its larger dimensions intact. They do not speak for authentic Islam but, gored on the horn of a unicorn, they lobby for a figment of the same name that does not and cannot exist. As Fawstin writes, “Islam — not any alleged deviant form of it — means misogyny, censorship, anti-Semitism, homophobia, wife-beatings, beheadings, honor killings, pedophilia/child marriages, murdering infidels, etc.” Daniel Pipes, founder of the Middle East Forum, concurs, at least in part, listing such “characteristically Muslim crimes” as gruesome murders, honor killings, female genital mutilation and slave holding as “among Islam’s contributions to the lands of immigration.”
The formula for a "good" Muslim embraces all of the above.
Not knowing much about Mohammedanism, the most shameful (and ridiculous) thing GWB did in the immediate aftermath of 911 was pump the "religion of peace" theme. The present illegal occupant of the White Hut, who orders the central socialist government agencies to buy up all the ammunition and spends a billion or so building a domestic spy computer center in the Utah desert, carries this lie forward. In America's name he arms the beligerants in Libya and by executive order and other stealth, arms those in Syria as well.
We should never have become embroiled in a ground war in Iraq or Afghanistan subsequent to 9/11. Rather, we should have immediately bombed Afghanistan rebel strongholds and the Saudi oilfields. Instead we waited for what seemed like an eternity then took on Sadam Hussein who posed no threat whatsoever, but did provide a buffer against Iran.
This is what results from electing a mystery numbskull as president, then stand idly by as he fills all the important spots with like-minded morons like Hillary Clinton, et al.
Sincere Evangelicals recoil in horror when one of their own is revealed to be a crook. Usually, except for a few die-hard “fans” (who follow a person rather than Christ), followers leave in droves and the “ministry” is left without support.
Sincere Roman Catholics recoil in horror when a member of their clergy is found to have been engaging in sexual misconduct, and donations dry up, and parishes close.
Sincere Protestants and Jews fire errant ministers, or the community splits into factions.
But what have muslims done since 9/11? They shelter terrorists, whine about being “discriminated against”, file litigation against innocent people for being “islamophobes”, attempt to build “IN YOUR FACE” mosques at the scene of terrorism, and never, ever, speak against a fellow muslim.
Evangelicals, Catholics, Protestants, and Jews can continue practicing their faith without sanctioning evil in their midst.
But muslims, it seems from anecdotal evidence, can not.
Whoever shelters a terrorist is, in fact, a terrorist themselves.
ping
Because of the chicken-hearted behavior on the part of American Christians and Jews our nation hasn’t a chance against the entrenched Muslims. They take over neighborhoods and then happily take over decaying cities.
Detroit, for example, is a pile of garbage thanks to the minorities moving in then trashing the place. This becomes Muslim Heaven to the Koran thumpers and they get a chance to recruit.
It’s amazing what’s happening in America given the fact that although Islam is composed of factions that war against each other, when they’re taking over a non-Muslim country they remain docile until the takeover is complete. They they kill each other and the winner finishes us off.
Meanwhile, our clueless political class continues to play live video games with their nation and forget it’s ours as well. We need to take command of our nation and if it means expelling all Muslims, then so be it.
Most everyone knows that Japan is still struggling with their economy, thanks mainly to a surging China eager to supply stupid Americans with all the junk they can stash away. However, Japan never admits a Muslim into their nation.
America, on the other hand, deliberately allows the scum of Mexican and South American society to stream over their borders and contaminate whatever decent society is left here. Mixed in with the border crossers are all varieties of Muslim killers eager to immolate themselves in order to get 72 virgins. They don’t care if they’re male or female.
If America doesn’t wake up soon it will be all over. The Muslims among us will turn off the lights.
http://therightscoop.com/video-this-is-awesome-my-name-is-paul-weston-and-i-am-a-racist/
Paul Weston, leader of Liberty GB party in the UK, makes an awesome speech. He says, if being a racist is loving your country and culture, and not wanting it destroyed by barbarians, then go ahead and call me a racist. He says the liberals, conservatives, media and everyone will call him a racist anyway, so just go ahead, he deflates the “fear factor” of so many who are so incredibly afraid of being called a racist that they will do anything to avoid it.
He points out the barbarism of Muslims and the absolute madness of importing millions of a people who are totally opposite your culture and who want to kill you. He speaks so frankly and calmly.
Ends by saying Tony Blair and the Labor party should be tried for treason for importing the Muslims and through hate crimes laws making it where British citizens can’t fight back.
Great video if you have a chance. It’s pretty short.
I saw it, saved it, shared it and agree with it wholeheartedly.
We’re going to have to move as an American united people against the evil Islam.
Yep.
“Chicken-hearted” is an excellent description.
IMHO Bush was trying to a) defang the Moslem "information warriors" at CAIR who were ready to pounce on any kufr "vendetta" or "persecution", and also b) defang liberal bleeding-heart liars who were ready to do the same thing and accuse the Bushmen and neocons of anti-Arabism and of painting with a broad brush many millions of innocent people.
The theme of this article is that they aren't so innocent after all, and that the worst-case scenario may be the only real one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.