Posted on 02/20/2006 7:46:11 AM PST by Dark Skies
When President Bush gave his "axis of evil" speech he went out of his way to make the world understand that it isn't a war with Islam itself that we were joining — and I say joining because the war had been started by the Jihadists decades before. And, in observance to our Western principles, that must be the correct way to view our conflagration with radical Islam.
Let's face facts, it certainly is uncomfortable to a Westerner who has been brought up on tolerance, freedom of religion, and liberty to contemplate a war against an entire religion. But are we approaching a time when Western nations won't have a choice but to target Islam itself in certain ways to keep their own people safe. The best course of action is to make public displays of Islam and certain of its practices illegal in Western nations.
So, the question becomes are we at that time now? Are we fast approaching a time when Mosques will be closed and banned? Have we come to a time when Islamic literature is turned away from our borders? Have the childish and dangerous reactions of Muslims to this cartoon in a Danish newspaper proven that Islam cannot be trusted to be a vital, peaceful, and law-abiding segment of society?
It is looking like yes is the answer to these queries.
We are already approaching this today. In Ontario they have officially outlawed Muslim Sharia law, that law that uses religious precepts to enforce moral and society codes of conduct. And Muslim "family councils" have been stopped where local community groups may supplement Canadian law with their local custom.
Several members of the John Howard administration in Australia have spoken out against Islamic clashes with Western notions of law and societal comportment many times over the last few years.
Recently Howard himself said, "I do think there is this particular complication because there is a fragment which is utterly antagonistic to our kind of society, and that is a difficulty ... You can't find any equivalent in Italian, or Greek, or Lebanese, or Chinese or Baltic immigration to Australia. There is no equivalent of raving on about jihad, but that is the major problem."
Muslims routinely destroy property, threaten death and bodily harm to those who speak out against them, and they constantly fund terrorism throughout the world. In Syria they have burnt an embassy, in Europe Muslims have been responsible for murdering people who have written out against Islam or made movies, and other forms of art. These actions are also approved by Islamic teachers (Imams) and religious leaders, not just undertaken by warped loners claiming to represent Islam quite against the will of the majority or authority.
With this ridiculous cartoon issue, we have seen that Islam has no sense of perspective. In the west parody or satire is seen as not only common, but completely harmless for the most part. And religion is not immune to parody and satire, though even in the west most people are often uncomfortable with religious satire. Usually only people filled with hate attack religion in parody and most in the West instinctively know this. As a result, most people dismiss such parody as foolishness and bad taste.
But with Muslims overreacting — in western eyes at least — to this silly cartoon issue in the way they have, it becomes nearly impossible for Westerners to view Islam as a peaceful religion, but more as a vicious hate group itself. And that perception is justified with the actions that Muslims have increasingly perpetrated over the ensuing years. So, we find that Islam presents a danger to the safety of the populace all too often. It is violent, oppressive, and reactionary.
But, what is to be done about it? We have been raised to feel that religion should be left untouched by government. Freedom of religion is at the very core of our beliefs. And this concept is an important one to uphold. So, how can we honestly and without hypocrisy begin to look toward making Islam illegal?
There is a parallel of sorts in the USA that might be used as a template for action. The Ku klux Klan.
After the Civil War ended, the KKK arose from the ashes of war as an advocacy group for the disenfranchised white voter in the south. But it quickly became a terrorist organization bent on taking out revenge on the south's newly freed black population for having lost the war. It got so bad that even one of the original organizers, C.S. Cavalry General Nathan Bedford Forrest, denounced the organization and quit it in disgust.
But as the late 1800s rolled on and the south began to re-enter the Union as full partners in government, the KKK began to lose steam and prominence. For a time it subsided. But as the 20th century neared, it re-emerged and this time became a nationwide and powerful force taking on the flavor of religious, civic and racial duty. The KKK became invested in government and claimed millions of members nation wide.
In the 1920s, however, it became too much for a liberty loving country to allow the KKK to any longer exist. In Indiana, the entire state government was scandalized by their fealty to Indiana's Klan leader who had raped and beaten his secretary on a train trip. Violence against and frequent lynching of southern blacks became so pervasive that Congress finally acted and banned the Klan. The organization collapsed never again to reclaim the power and prominence it once had.
Now, the KKK has always based its precepts on Christianity, as well as racial identity. It also reacted with violence, rallies, death threats and killing when it was threatened. It careened far away from being a mere "idea" or religious theology and became a terrorist organization. And it became a terrorist organization even though literally millions of Americans that belonged to or identified with the Klan were not themselves violent, evil, or dangerous citizens.
The leadership of the Klan supported violence. The leadership preached violence. The leadership planned and fomented it. Therefore, it had to go because it became a danger to every law-abiding citizen, whether they agreed with the racial and religious concepts the Klan espoused or not.
Islam has become the KKK of the 21st century. The sooner we awake to this truth and take steps to ban the religion, or somehow curtail its pernicious influence the better. The west is going to have to put sever restrictions on Islamic Mosques and public display of Islam. Further, devout Muslims should not be allowed to hold public office (though it certainly should not become a racial issue — sins of the father should not be visited upon the sons).
This is no religious purge as in centuries past. In the past religions were banned to be replaced by the state sponsored sect and believers of the banned religion were mistreated, tortured, unduly taxed, and terrorized. This is absolutely not the model the west would follow by banning aspects of Islam today. No religion is replacing Islam and no one is suggesting that Muslims be mistreated. But the creed to which they hold is fast becoming the most dangerous one in the world today. It is a fine line that we walk to consider banning Islam, but the safety of society is at risk not to do so.
This is not an easy conclusion at which to arrive. But if we continue to turn a blind eye to the danger that Islam presents to the west, we are signing our own death warrants.
The KKK was put down in the USA and made powerless for the same reason. Communism was destroyed for the same reason, as well. Islam is a danger to the world.
Unfortunately, it is just that simple.
No one cares what you (rhetorical 'you', not you 'you')believe. It's when your beliefs cross the line from peaceful contemplation and activities to deadly action that we begin to take notice.
We take even more notice when for every passage of the Koran that extolls mercy, justice and charity, is another that makes it your holy duty to rape, plunder and pillage, provided you can find an excuse (i.e. fatwa). Only Islam casts the baser aspects of human nature as virtues so long as the target can somehow be labelled "infidel" or "apostate", no matter how flimsy the pretense.
Get this trough your head: Islam IS NOT A RELIGION. It's a justification.
My friend, those do not seem to be accurate observations. If they were, I could very easily be proven wrong, and pray that you might do so.
What I deduce from my observations, and I have both lived and workled for long periods in Muslim lands, is that if most Muslims were against Islamic terrorism, it would not exist. More specifically, it certainly could not exist as a global phenomenon. You would be more correct to say that most Muslims do not publicly endorse terrorism. There is no need for them to do so, since their acknowledged religious leaders do it for them.
But in our culture, in Anglo-Saxon and Roman Law, silence can be deemed consent. IMHO, when it comes to terrorism, the silence of the Muslims is absolutely deafening.
"Islam is a toxic culture--not just a religion."
Got it in one.
That's whit is must be utterly destroyed
I have a mental scenario of how that could very easily happen. A bombing in Hollywierd. Can you picture the stunned, bloody faces of the "beautiful people", as they stagger through the rubble of what was the Oscar's, or some other BS event, as they try to comprehend how they could be attacked by the very people they tried to help kill Americans in Iraq?
So dull, so self-absorbed are these absolute sacks of excrement, that they don't even realize that the Islamofascists reserve their most virulent rage against THEM, the purveyors of all the depravity and narcissism that kinda sickens us too...except we learned to just change the channel.
"ISTR the treason charges were dropped, but I could be mistaken."
There were never treason charges against Yee. He was charged with espionage. All charges against him have since been dropped, and all record of them has been removed from his military records.
He is no longer in the military and has written a book.
There were never charges of treason against him. He is a free man with no criminal record.
Here, we deal with individuals and their behavior. We can do that just fine.
And in a couple of generations as Muslims increasingly become the majority that makes the laws, repeals the First Amendment and otherwise amends and interprets the Constitution as they see fit, and one's grandaugheter is in some sheik's harem in Chicago, then what? That's their plan, isn't it?
Cordially,
The big difference is that islam still enforces every call for beheading, every call for amputation, every call for stoning.
Maybe the distinction between the word and the action is a bit too subtle for you?
One stupid Muslim does not justify banning a religion. The crazies win if that happens. It's hard to separate the good from bad, but it's the right course.
Islam is a religion and is therefore protected by the first Amendment. If Islamic leaders are preaching terrorism, the government may go after them for inciting a riot or for advocating overthrow of the US. But the government may not ban Islam itself without modifying the first Amendment.
"Well let's see how clever you are in coming up with something legal to stop this spiritual cancer."
I have already done that. If a Muslim cleric or any other muslim who is under the jurisdiction of the United States of America breaks a law, prosecute that person to the fullest extent of the law.
That's how our system works. It's very simple.
Then we need another amendment to make an exception for Islam.
No, it's the text of the first political cartoon ever printed in an American newspaper. It was created by Ben Franklin to convince the colonies that they had to join in the fight against England, or die. It is also the precursor to the Gadsden flag ("Don't tread on me").
You can view this illustration in my profile.
But congratulations on making yourself look like fool for your ignorance of our nations history and trying to make me look like a militant islam sympathizer all at once.
You know I am getting very tired of the "most mudslimes" are good argument when the only PROOF we have seen is evil and celebrating evil. If "most mudslimes" believed in peace we should have seen thousands of them in the streets over the last 40 years protesting the acts of the "few" radicals.
Somehow that never happened but we have seen thousands protest a few truthful cartoons.
Lay off the "most mudslime" garbage unless you have facts to back it up. Without exception, everything we have witnessed in the last 40 years tells us most are bad.
As for the "state church" argument, try and remember that the Mormons were the first settlers of any size in the whole Utah Territory. What other form of government could they possibly have elected except one that included a majority of Mormons? They elected a working legislature and responded to the chosen governor. Brigham Young was appointed Territorial Governor by the Feds. The Mormons were also pro-Federal Government, pro-national Constitution and anti-slavery even when the Feds sent an army against them.
Name one American beheaded on American soil by an American Muslim acting purely in the name of Islam.
Just 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.