Jihad Is Knocking: Another Episode in the War between Christendom and Islam - (sensational piece!)

VICTOR HANSON.COM ^ | JULY 10, 2005 | BRUCE THORNTON

[CHARLITE]

The slaughter in London is another grisly wake-up call that likely will go as unheeded as earlier ones. Already the standard narrative is being trotted out: evildoers created by what the New York Times predictably called the “root causes of terrorism”: autocracy, or economic stagnation, or Palestinian suffering, or globalization's dislocations, or Western historical sins, or the war in Iraq (the cause will depend on the political prejudices of the pundit) have “hijacked” Islam and distorted its peaceful message.

And now they are using Islam to justify murder in order to further their own ambitions or dysfunctional psychic needs. Given this explanation, so the story goes, we must be careful not to demonize all Muslims and assure them that we respect their religion and culture. The tale is then wrapped up with fierce threats against the terrorists and protestations of admiration for Islam.

Believing this delusion requires that one ignores fourteen centuries of Islamic jihad against the West, a war of conquest and colonization ratified by centuries of Islamic theology and jurisprudence. Indeed, what we call Islamic radicals are in fact Islamic traditionalists; it is the so-called “moderates” — those wanting to compromise Islam so it can coexist with Western ideas such as secular government, separation of church and state, and human rights — who are the radicals and innovators.

The terrorists are simply fulfilling the traditional and orthodox command of their religion to battle the infidels who resist the revelation of Mohammed and the global socio-political order mandated by Islam.

Listen to one of the most respected and influential of Muslim clerics, Sheikh Yousef Al-Qaradhawi, on the legitimacy of jihad:

[GOPJ]

Part of the root cause of terrorism goes back to Abraham. When God asked him to sacrifice his son, he agreed. And the father's willingness to kill his son on the alter encouraged irrational authority being acceptable. Each Imam isn't a God, but they have authority beyond anything a westerner can imagine. In our cafeteria way of dealing with religion (where everyone picks and chooses the parts of the Bible (or any other religious book) that they want to stress - Muslims chose this part. The part the reinforces blind authority.

By tradition that authority has been transferred to every two bit Mosque idiot. That power has a choke hold on Muslim cultures. It's also the reason they have suicide bombers and we don't. It's culturally supported. (Did you know the place in Mecca where all Muslims must go is the place where Abraham was asked to kill his son?)

[philman_36]

I find it insulting that you think that I was "called in as a reinforcement." I happened to be reading this thread and thought to express my own opinion. I do no one's bidding on this forum.
Did I mention you in particular? NO. I mentioned it as a generic opinion. If I wanted to say that I thought you were called in, in particular, you know me well enough to know that I would. I expect the other poster to go back and read the thread and come to his own conclusions. I merely included you in on the post to keep from making more than one post as I've often done in the past. Chill out!

If you think my position is that we should "just be nice to everybody" you obviously don't know me very well.
I know you as well as anyone can from your replies and in those replies you go to great efforts to call for appeasement in many things. If I can't judge you by your responses then it isn't the real you who is posting.
As I said above, there are ways to prosecute this war without violating the First Amendment.
Yes, there are. I agree. However, deporting someone based upon their religion isn't establishing a national religion which is what the First is about and is supposed to prevent. It would be about ensuring this nation against an internal threat.
I have no trouble with monitoring mosques, profiling people getting on planes, or waging a huge religious propaganda war.
Nor do I, however, only one of those things has anything whatsoever to do with the First Amendment.
And you have a seeming contradiction. You first say that there is a way to wage war "without violating the First Amendment" yet you're willing to propagandize a religion. If that isn't violating the First Amendment, as I gather you interpret it, then explain how it isn't.
I do object to deportation based on religion, and I would be loathe to support internment unless there were no other alternative.
Then that is merely your opinion. I have no problem with it myself. I think every follower of Islam ought to be shipped out as a security threat.
Can't others have a different opinion than yours? How about if their opinion comports with the law and yours doesn't? If a person can be deported based on their nationality or nation of origin then why can't they be deported because of their religion?
TITLE 50 > CHAPTER 3 > § 21. Restraint, regulation, and removal
Whenever there is a declared war between the United States and any foreign nation or government, or any invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrated, attempted or threatened against the territory of the United States by any foreign nation or government, and the President makes public proclamation of the event, all natives, citizens, denizens, or subjects of the hostile nation or government, being of the age of fourteen years and upward, who shall be within the United States and not actually naturalized, shall be liable to be apprehended, restrained, secured, and removed as alien enemies. The President is authorized in any such event, by his proclamation thereof, or other public act, to direct the conduct to be observed on the part of the United States, toward the aliens who become so liable; the manner and degree of the restraint to which they shall be subject and in what cases, and upon what security their residence shall be permitted, and to provide for the removal of those who, not being permitted to reside within the United States, refuse or neglect to depart therefrom; and to establish any other regulations which are found necessary in the premises and for the public safety.
So a specific religion could be added under the "to establish any other regulations" aspect of existing law including adding those who are naturalized followers of said religion.

I do not wish my government to violate the Constitution, and practically, such behavior would be detrimental to our ultimate goal of victory in this war.
I wish my government would've used better judgement before allowing potentially dangerous people into the nation in the first place. They've known the ways of Islamists for centuries.

We will have ultimate victory or ultimate defeat because the enemy views things in such absolute terms. Anything less means our loss and because of what some in America, including yourself, "believe" we're going to lose! Being PC and "nice" is gonna get us all killed.

[philman_36]

(Did you know the place in Mecca where all Muslims must go is the place where Abraham was asked to kill his son?)
Where in the world did you get this from? Since I don't "know it" educate me.
My understanding and readings are that it happened on Mount Moria where the Temple was to be built later.
I'm really looking forward to this!

[Miss Marple]

Until you can find one post of mine in which I support appeasement, I am not going to waste time in discussion with you. I support the war on terror. I always have.

[GoldwaterChick]

"If you doubt me in the least, do you not believe that if the MSM could find ONE moderate Islamist they'd not have him on the air 24/7?"

Actually they are still looking--that's Dan Ratter's lastest assignment.

[philman_36]

Until you can find one post of mine in which I support appeasement, I am not going to waste time in discussion with you.
You've got a post right on this thread!
"I do object to deportation based on religion, and I would be loathe to support internment unless there were no other alternative."

To appease: "to try to conciliate or bribe (a potential aggressor) by making concessions, frequently with implication of sacrifice of principles" Concise Oxford Dictionary, 1963 edition.
You believe it's all about upholding the First Amendment when it isn't. Nobody is establishing a national religion yet you're attempting to reconcile your reticence of deportation or detention into a First Amendment issue when it is nothing of the sort!
That's your appeasement!

[Miss Marple]

That is not appeasement. It is following the Constitution.

I was right. You are a waste of time. Good day.

[wardaddy]

Good post....but it incorporates not just Arabs....Muslims from everywhere....even homegrown USA types.

[philman_36]

That is not appeasement.
Yes, it is. Believe, however, as you will. I don't think anyone could persuade you differently no matter what they showed you, even your own words as I have done.
It is following the Constitution.
That is your opinion.
I'm beginning to think that you don't understand what the First Amendment of the Constitution is all about.
I was right. You are a waste of time.
That also is merely your opinion.
Good day.
Why wish me what you don't really desire for me?

[John Filson]

The idea that it would invigorate the Afghanis and Iraqis is provably false; look at how excised a group of them got over the fake Koran abuse story in Newsweek.

You actually use that as evidence that trustworthy Muslims won't be encouraged by our resolve? I believe you when you say this, but I think you should really dig down deep and reason this through. There wouldn't be one single trustworthy Muslim in the outcry against an inanimate bound paper object. Not a single one. But there were certainly frightened Muslims who wondered if we really had the courage of our convictions.

Now imagine that we either deport or intern all Muslims in the US; what reaction do you think this would cause in the Muslim world?

More outrage? And possibly a fresh view of Americans. It would send a clear and resounding message: stand with Americans or feel their wrath. We could always discontinue the internments and deportations if we got the results we've been hoping for, but never seeing: enough of a sense that another 7,000 casualties weren't waiting to occur out of the nearest Islamic "worship" center.

I am not for violating American citizens' civil rights, even if I am mistrustful of some members of their group.

What about the rights of our dead children? Where are their rights? You seem to be inured to the fact that the whole world has changed. You're too numb to realize that your beautiful, idealistic country has been invaded; peace and tranquility is gone until we crush the threat within and without. You're still living in a Disneyland of "small world after all." That world is gone.

[John Filson]

Are you including the hundreds of Muslim troops serving honorably in our Armed Forces, the thousands of Muslim professionals working here, including many who help design our high tech weapons, and others who provide medical and dental care in underserved places you wouldn't want to live..?

Yes. Intern and deport them all, any one who is a fundamentalist and mosque-attending Muslim. We can always alter our course when we see positive results. I say again: waiting around for the next Sgt. Akbar to strike, or the next King's Cross is not an option.

Come up with a suggestion that doesn't involve violating assimilated American citizens' rights, and I'll listen. Until then I'm sticking with my argument.

[Tolik]

Bruce Thornton:

...In any conflict it's a good idea to take seriously the motives the enemy professes and not rationalize or explain them away in terms of your own cultural assumptions. The murderers we call terrorists are traditional jihadists, as much as were the first Islamic armies that swept away the Judeo-Christian and Greco-Roman civilizations of the Mediterranean. They are not going to be bought off with votes, a free press, more cable channels, Wal-Mart, or any other material good that to us constitutes the good life. They are fighting for a spiritual cause, the establishment of Islam as a global order in fulfillment of the will of Allah, and the reduction of all those who will not become Muslims to dhimmi, inferiors who acknowledge the superiority of Islam and the rightness of their subjection to it.

The next few weeks will show whether the British have advanced as far down the road of dhimmitude as have the Spaniards, who responded to the murder of their citizens not with the force and resistance their ancestors showed for seven centuries, but with fear and appeasement. As for us, we'd better discard our illusions that the jihadists, as Thomas Freidman put it, are “a cancer within the [Islamic] body politic” and accept instead that jihad just may be a vital organ. Then maybe we can see this war for what it is: one more episode in the long struggle between what used to be called Christendom and a religion of aggressive conquest and colonization

Strong Opinion!

    This ping list is not author-specific for articles I'd like to share. Some for perfect moral clarity, some for provocative thoughts; or simply interesting articles I'd hate to miss myself. (I don't have to agree with the author 100% to feel the need to share an article.) I will try not to abuse the ping list and not to annoy you too much, but on some days there is more of good stuff that is worthy attention. You can see the list of articles I pinged to lately on my page.

       Besides this one, I keep separate PING lists for my favorite authors Victor Davis Hanson, Orson Scott Card, David Warren and Lee Harris (sometimes). You are welcome in or out, just freepmail me (and note which PING list you are talking about).

[Mrs. Don-o]

Thanks

[Terriergal]

Ever see a weasel kill a rabbit?

The rabbit won't run because the weasel is so much smaller, it doesn't see it as a threat. The weasel nips and nips at the rabbit until the thing is so exhausted from lack of blood and shock that it succumbs.

[Dark Skies]

Yes. Intern and deport them all, any one who is a fundamentalist and mosque-attending Muslim.

It may come to that rather quickly, but that is not a solution to the problem.

Iran will soon have a ability to deliver a nuke to Israel. And soon after that to London or Vienna or Berlin.

Islam itself must be somehow outlawed and all Mosques must be razed...or Islam will not sleep until all Christians and Jews are dead. And then it will start eliminating the atheists, Hindus, secular humanists, and all other non-muslims that refuse to convert.

Islam, when practiced with devotion, is a spiritual disease. This planet will not rest until Islam is expunged from the face of the earth.

[Cronos]

The “root causes of terrorism” is

No, the root cause IS IsSSlam

[Cronos]

Bogus essay. We are not at war with Islam and Muslims, but with terrorists.

No, we ARE at war withIslam -- we have been at war since the 7th century. Remember that Egypt, Syria, Turkey were all Christian nations once before the Christians were slaughtered, forced to convert, treated as second class citizens etc.

[Cronos]

Have you read abotu Islsam conquering formerly christian lands and forcing them to convert? Have you read about whatIslam did to the Christians in the Balkans? Have you read about the 100 million+ hindus killed when they ravaged the Indian sub-continent?

[lemura]

I support the war on terror.

That says it all - thanks for the clarification. Until you can distinguish between an enemy and a tactic, you're merely playing the part of facilitator.

General comment to thread: there are only two possible outcomes at this late stage in the Crusades (1,000 years later and the advent of WMD). (1) Either Islam will reform itself by adapting to secular society or (2) it will be wiped out.

#2 won't probably occur for 100+ years or so, and may not even be caused by a unified USA. Rather, it might be accomplished by a rump USA (comprised of current Red states) after a WMD strike hits NYC and/or DC.

[USF]

Thanks for the ping DS... yet another excellent slice of VDH to start to week with. ;o)

This is a war between the believing Christians and Jews on one side...

Don't forget the Indian Hindus the Koranimals are massacring or Buddhists in Thailand etc. Everywhere islam goes, Jihad and death is sure to follow.

The only islamic country that has attempted to seriously crack down on the extremes of islam had to use an iron fist along with the ruthless determination of the Kemalists. But it's clear the methods they used would be unacceptable to many here, never mind the liberal PC crowd in EUrabia.

Islam and democracy are not compatible. I still hope exposure to democracy and other outside influences can kill large chunks of islamic belief and thus bring the rest of the lies down like a house of cards, but as history shows, the islamic cancer has to be suppressed and contained first or it's likely to spread and kill off whatever democratic institutions are put in place - after they have been used as tools to gain power.