Ralph Peters Unhinged

Columnist, novelist, and retired United States Army Lt. Col. Ralph Peters has earned a reputation as an often insightful and provocative analyst of military affairs and geopolitics. But of late, he has taken to villifying those who examine the theology and practice of Jihad in Islam.

Writing what can only be characterized as an unhinged column in the September 7, 2006 New York Post, military analyst Ralph Peters lashed out at those he labeled “Islam haters”. In a breathless series of vicious calumnies (summarized here), Peters claimed that those he lacked the courage to name, were: “an enemy within”, represent “the most repugnant trend” in the current debate on Islam, are more “destructive” than the anti-American left, are members of an ugly “domestic insurgency” among “right-wing extremists bent on discrediting honorable conservatism”, believe that “all Muslims are evil and subhuman”, believe “that Muslims are Untermenschen”, are promoting “the Protocols of the Elders of Mecca”, are “just the Ku Klux Klan with higher-thread-count sheets”, are “heirs of the creeps who once told us Jews can never be real Americans and JFK will serve the Vatican”, are “inveterate haters … whose personal disappointments have left them with a need to blame others (sounds like al Qaeda to me…)”, and are “bigots [who] might like to try to kill a billion Muslims”.

Robert Spencer has posted an eloquent rebuttal to Mr. Peters article at Jihad Watch. My response focuses on Peters follow-up appearance to discuss his calumniating article on the Friday, September, 8, 2006 Laura Ingraham Show. This morning (9/11’s fifth anniversary) he is back on the attack, in a symposium at Front Page Magazine, provoking the moderator to respond,

“With all due respect Mr. Peters, you are creating fictitious arguments and stances that no one of importance and real influence believes in and that no one here believes in— and then you are knocking them down.”

During his interview with Ms. Ingraham, Peters held up Indonesia “the world’s most populous Muslim country” as a paragon of moderate Islam. This is the same Indonesia that in the mid-1960s, Sukarno fatwa in hand, waged a murderous jihad against its own Chinese non-Muslim population which killed at least 100,000 ethnic Chinese. In the 1980s a frankly genocidal jihad was waged by the Indonesian government against the Christians of East Timor, leaving hundreds of thousands dead. For at least the past decade, there have been intermittent Indonesian jihadist pogroms against the Christians of the Moluccas which have also killed thousands.

The current Indonesian government released the jihadist leader Bashir after a trivial sentence despite his role in the Bali bombings. As MEMRI reports, this popular Muslim thug wants Indonesia to become, officially, a theocratic “Allah-cracy”. Moreover, during a recent state sanctioned visit to Indonesia, Iranian President Ahmadinejad was welcomed by throngs of adoring Muslim Indonesian college students.

And for five centuries ongoing, Aceh has been a hotbed of irredentist jihadism. Here is what the great Dutch scholar Hurgronje (who lived in Aceh and was a sympathetic, but thoroughly honest student of Acehnese culture) wrote at the beginning of the 20th century (1906) about Aceh:

From Mohammedanism (which for centuries she [i.e., Aceh] is reputed to have accepted) she really only learnt a large number of dogmas relating to hatred of the infidel without any of their mitigating concomitants; so the Acehnese made a regular business of piracy and man-hunting at the expense of the neighboring non-Mohammedan countries and islands, and considered that they were justified in any act of treachery or violence to European (and latterly to American) traders who came in search of pepper, the staple product of the country. Complaints of robbery and murder on board ships trading in Acehnese parts thus grew to be chronic

Lastly, with regard to Indonesia, in present day Aceh, where Sharia Law officially prevails, this past week Muslim mobs razed a church in response to a forged (i.e., by a Muslim) advertisement inviting Muslims to a Christian revival service. Here is a published account of what transpired:

Witnesses said there were over 100 [Muslim] men present, many of them carrying swords. The mob poured gasoline over the building and set fire to it; they also attempted to burn a second building that was used as a church kindergarten. Some of the attackers came looking for Saragih and Netty at their home, which is nearby. The couple escaped into the nearby jungle and stayed hidden in the undergrowth. Many thought the couple had been consumed in the flames of the church buildings, but a friend found them at around 4 a.m. Christians in a neighboring province have provided shelter for Saragih [the pastor of the Mission Church which was attacked] and his wife, following reports that local police and Muslim leaders are still searching for the couple. It is uncertain when – or if – they will be free to return home.

But it was Mr. Peter’s confabulatory response to an e-mail question asking him about the number of fatwas issued to condemn the forced conversion of kidnapped Fox News reporters Centanni and Wiig, that was most revealing. Peter’s stated, that he didn’t know of any such fatwas issued, specifically, but he was certain there must have been many. I have written about the forced conversions of Centanni and Wiig, and the day before Mr. Peters appeared on the Laura Ingraham Show, my essay describing the burgeoning problem of violent Muslim Jew hatred in Western Europe was published. It is ironic (and depressing) that what I called for (Vatican II style reforms of Islam itself) is reiterated by Mr. Peters himself , in a slightly different (and less specific, less informed) idiom,

“The long overdue liberal reformation within the Islamic world can only be carried out by Muslims themselves”.

Yet for expressing the same sentiments as Peters’, his repugnant innuendo labels unnamed others as hatemongering bigots, fomenting genocide.

Finally, I have two questions for Mr. Peters regarding the obscene immoral equivalence he made in a February 2006 essay published in the Weekly Standard, which gives the appearance of glorifying jihad terrorists. Peters wrote,

We write off the suicide bomber as a criminal, a wanton butcher, a terrorist. Yet, within his spiritual universe, he’s more heroic than the American soldier who throws himself atop a grenade to spare his comrades: He isn’t merely protecting other men, but defending his god.

1) Who is Peters to say that the American soldier’s act of true self-sacrifice isn’t “defending his god” by Loving His Neighbor?

2) Is saving comrades really comparable to killing and maiming innocents, the latter in pursuit of an imagined heavenly harem of compliant Muslim virgins?

Peters comparison of jihad terrorists and American soldiers in this thoughtless essay is dangerously unhinged—about as unhinged as the crude innuendos in his New York Post piece, which the Council on American-Islamic Relations enjoyed enough to include in its “American Muslim New Briefs” of 9/8/06.

Raplh Peters should like this (sarc)

“Surviving Mohammedism: A Guide for Countering PC Idiots in the 21st Century”

This is not going to be an interminable tract delineating the scope and the magnitude of the barbarous assault Mohammedism (let’s not use PC compliant terms like “Islam”) is waging against the West; that’s been done already, copiously recorded and reported in any number of broadcast and print media, blogs and internet web sites. This is a simple program; it requires no organizational skill or gathering of resources, capital, or mass membership in some cause driven assembly or caravan of fellow-travellers. It is simply a set of personal rules to follow daily and to adhere to without deviance for any reason.

Let’s begin then.

Rule One. If you attend a church, synagogue, temple or participate in some other religious/spiritual congregation of like-minded fellows, and the leadership (pastors, rabbis, priests, gurus or what have you) describes Mohammedism as a religion of peace, as being one of the three “Great Abrahamic Monotheistic Religions” the other two being Judaism and Christianity, you must either persuade the leadership to stop stating this absurdity or you must stop attending, participating, tithing, or supporting the organization. Just say “no”. And then act on your decision. Vote with your time, with your support and with your money.

Rule Two. Politically, all elected officials from Town Administrator to President of the United States, desperately need your support, money, and vote. Any elected official that makes the above claim about Mohammedism, and then appends “that Islam has been hi-jacked by radical extremists”, must never receive your support, money, or your vote. Find someone rational who deserves your support. Do not support or vote for appeasers and apologists for Mohammedism who renege on their constitutional oath to “Protect, Honour and Defend the People and the Constitution of the United States from all Enemies Foreign and Domestic”. Just say no. And stand by your convictions (this rule applies to officials who refuse to defend our borders as well but that will be addressed in a different tract “Surviving Illegal Aliens: An Idiots Guide to the Traitors Who Are Destroying our Borders and Surrendering our Culture”).

Rule Three. Identify those products and/or services that fund any Mohammedan run company or proselytizing activity and boycott them. Just say no. This is fairly easy to do as the Mohammedan world exports little of consequence except of course, oil and terror. How to get along without oil? Find the alternatives you can afford and apply them to your lifestyle. Telecommute/teleconference whenever you can, walk or bike to the market, postpone or cancel travel to the extent you are able. Buy a hybrid vehicle, or convert to burn used vegetable oil in your car; buy a scooter (150 mpg), get a coal, wood, or wood pellet burning stove, or if your climate is sunny, look into solar and solar assisted energy systems. Buy a push mower. Wind power is available if you live where wind is constant. Even if you live in a place populated by fat hypocritical liberals like Ted Kennedy who has opposed wind power farms off Cape Cod, you can buy and install smaller wind generator units for personal use. Burn candles for lighting and enjoy the ambience! Dry your wash on a clothesline. View every calorie you switch to a different energy source as one more bullet in the neck of the Mohammedan terror. (Hugo Chavez’ Venezuela can also be in your sights which is just a happy bonus.)

Rule Four. Any politician unwilling to expand exploration and refinery capacity in the United States of America is undeserving of being an American much less a leader. Just say no, and vote them out office.

Rule Five. Identify Mohammedan institutions and businesses operating in the United States and peacefully do all in your power to cut off their air (boycott them economically), embarrass, mock and ridicule them. Disrupt their public gatherings with proof of their perfidy and violence. They will not disappoint you. Their howls of anguish will not be pleas to reconcile their differences with you but to call for your destruction. Mohammedans have outlawed (under pain of death) any faith but Mohammedism in their spiritual homeland of Saudi Arabia (our “ally”). Shall we not fairly reciprocate in kind in our own national, spiritual homeland, the United States of America?

Rule Six. Mohammedism is a terror-based death cult and has always been a terror-based death cult. It is not and has never been a “religion of peace”. Whenever you are asked what we should do about Mohammedism or about stopping the terror Mohammedism visits daily on the civilized world, smile gently and say “Kill them all of course, unless they recant and discard their bloody, terrorist, so-called religion.” Then you should ask politely “what do you think we should do?” Be pleasant at all costs, the solution offered is admittedly harsh, however, since the solution is the in fact the demonstrated course of action the Mohammedans have embarked on against us, you are merely being reasonable. No sense being obnoxious about it, the Mohammedans picked the fight and they made the rules; which are simple: there are no rules. No other fix is possible or even imaginable. Mohammedism must be destroyed and you must be unabashed to advance the premise that the destruction of Mohammedism is an imperative rather than a choice among options. I personally do not view dhimmitude as an option for Americans. I leave that option to the Eurabians—they have already opted for dhimmitude. Buh bye Chirac!!! Best wishes mon ami; if I have time, I’ll send you some of the Korans we will soon be burning as fuel in our wood stoves all over the United States…

Rule Seven. Do not give aid or comfort to the enemy. Do not patronize any 7-11, Golden Gallon, Stop and Go, etc., that employs Mohammedan workers. Same rule applies for hotels and restaurants, landscapers, retail stores, airlines, manufacturers or any other commercial activity. Cut off the air supply of your money. Do not knowingly hire Mohammedans.

Rule Eight. Arm yourself with both truth and weapons. The truth will be your comfort; the weapons will be your defence in the coming war. Ensure you have a good supply of both. You will be unarmed for the future if you neglect this preparation by allowing yourself and your loved ones to be lulled to sleep by the chattering appeasers and the surrender monkeys in Paris, London, Berlin, and Washington.

Rule Nine. When you meet a Mohammedan, ask point blank “do you support the constitution of the United States and will you put America first in all you do, or are you a faithful Mohammedan first, lying in wait to destroy our freedom and to attempt to conquer my country?” Be sure to tell them (before they answer), you do not ask the question to get an answer, you fully expect they will lie to you in any event, whether they affirm the former and deny the latter or pick a third position (obfuscation is an art form with these wretches). You just want them to know you have already made up your mind on what to do regardless of their answer and they are not welcome in our country as long as they are Mohammedans. The day is coming when all the Mohammedans will leave America whether they want to or not. You care not whether they leave under their own power or in a body bag, so long as they leave. After all, this is what Mohammedans intend for us in their lands as well as here in America.

Rule Ten. Post and write everything you know about the “religion of peace” all over the internet, on store bulletin boards, telephone poles, and to your local paper. Get your own website and sell merchandise supporting the elimination of the terror spawning cult of Mohammedism. Call them Mohammedans whenever you refer to them. They really hate this because it is exactly what they are (and what they have always been called by all educated westerners until PC and a general acceptance of dhimmitude began to re-shape our language and distort every useful word or phrase employed for the purpose of discernment and judgment). Dishonouring the filthy author and sole vector of an insane, virulent violent ideology of terror is appropriate. One cannot deny that Mohammedism has enslaved and condemned billions to utter despair and hopelessness in this life as well as to eternal death in the next. Until the death cult of Mohammed is finally eradicated from among all the peoples of the Earth, you and your loved ones will forever live under the increasingly imminent threat of death and violence at their hands.

Symposium: 9/11: Five Years Later
By Jamie Glazov
FrontPageMagazine.com | September 11, 2006

Peters: Well, first of all, the sky isn't falling. Since 9/11, we've made great progress on multiple fronts. That doesn't mean that a final victory is in sight--if it comes at all, it will arrive generations from now. But the Feds have kept our homeland remarkably safe, despite the determination of Islamist extremists to do us harm.

We have taken the fight to the terrorists and, in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere, we're now terrorizing the terrorists. Inevitably, they'll land another blow. But we've pushed them on to the strategic defensive. Despite mainstream media and left-wing nonsense, al-Qaeda is far weaker than it was, without a protected, open base. There are many other strains of Islamist terrorism, though, from the growing Shi'a terror threat to Sunni splinter groups with various aims (none of them rational or constructive). Extremism in motion breeds more extremism: Extremists spawn ultra-extremists who then spawn ultra-ultra extremists who think the mere extremists are too weak-willed. Old story--it arises in deeply troubled societies. And the greater Middle East just may be the most troubled civilization in recorded history.

Yes, we are in a clash of civilizations. PC denials are just plain goofy. But, then, clashing is what civilizations do--in military parlance, it's their Darwinian "mission statement." Even beyond that, though, we're simultaneously witnessing the ultimate crash of a once-great, still-vain civilization, that of Middle Eastern Islam. Middle Eastern cultures (and I stretch the region to include Pakistan) are not competitive in a single positive sphere of human endeavor. And their self-wrought failure is humiliating to them, so they indulge themselves in a culture of blame: If the water pressure falls, it's the fault of Israel, or the U.S., or Mossad, or the CIA. That culture of blame is emotionally satisfying, but paralyzing. Show me the Arab society willing to roll up its sleeves and fix its own problems.

I do diverge from the other participants on a few points. I've been privileged to spend a good bit of time not only in the greater Middle East, but, over the past half-dozen years, on the far fringes of the Islamic world. Religions--all religions--as practiced on earth are what men and women make them. At least for now, our problem is with the stagnant, suffocating forms of Islam practiced from North Africa through Pakistan. Elsewhere, I've found Muslims remarkably tolerant and spiritually healthy--faiths change on their frontiers. We only hear about the handful of terrorists and extremists in Indonesia, for example. But, outside of Aceh and a few urban neighborhoods, Indonesian forms--plural--of Islam are humane and absorptive (if sometimes downright weird). In Senegal, Muslims have resisted Wahhabi missionary efforts and want no part of Bedouin Islam. I found the Senegalese startlingly pro-American (and increasingly disenchanted with the French). I believe, firmly, that the long-overdue liberal reformation in Islam is coming--in Michigan or Ontario.

My point: Blanket condemnations of Islam are stupid and counter-productive. We've got enough enemies in the Middle East (and we need to get a lot more serious about killing them). Why make other enemies unnecessarily? Perhaps Islam will turn violent and anti-Western elsewhere--but at present that is not the case. Let's concentrate on the killers, not the bystanders. Why unify the Islamic world against us when it's usefully divided?

I also disagree that we are a primary target for Iranian nukes (which Tehran likely will get, since the West is so gutless). We're way, way down on the target list. While the Iranians--Persians, really--seek nukes to deter our military in the region, when it comes down to who-gets-hit-first, it's a coin-toss between Israel and Sunni Arabs. We're too self-absorbed to recognize that we're just passing through (even if we stay in the Middle East for another century). The real, enduring, merciless struggle is between Sunni and Shia (as in Iraq). Human beings may hate a distant enemy in theory, but they prefer butchering their neighbors.

I worry about Israel's future. It may not have one. Europe couldn't care less if Tel Aviv and Haifa disappear under mushroom clouds. Israel's remarkable success is as embarrassing to Europeans as it is to Arabs. Israel's only meaningful allies are in the English-speaking world.

Finally, Iraq: Even if our noble effort fails, it was worth it. If Iraq goes south--and the odds are now about fifty-fifty--it won't ultimately be an American failure, but yet another tragic Arab failure.

We made no end of mistakes in Iraq. But, thanks to the skill and valor of our troops, we nonetheless gave the Iraqis a unique chance to build the first true Arab constitutional democracy. If they fail to seize that chance, it's a lick on them.

We shall remain powerful, wealthy and indestructible. But we'll get some more bruises in this very long fight.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=24313

"I stand corrected. I reread the article and it's now clear that Peters is worse than Howard Dean. "

Prior to whatever he said recently, he certainly was *NOT* worse than Howard Dean, he is not a Liberal, was an excellent reporter on Iraq and GWOT, and wasn't as far as I could tell un hinged in any way.

Having just read it, I think Peters is way off base, but certainly not a Howard Dean. If there are 'nuke Mecca' people who think we need to fight 1 billion muslims and think of muslims as Peters says they do, they need to scolded as idiots. (When it happens here on FR too). We have to distinguish between the great danger of radicalized Islam and the non-danger that most Muslims pose.

But Peters' column is making a strawman argument that critics of Islam are attacking Muslims as a whole. And his defense of Islam and Muslims is curious. He mentions Indonesia, but seems unaware of sectarian violence there (or he would point it out as an exception). one example: Muslim thugs beheaded some Indonesian girls for the crime of being Christian last year. Such a crime would be unbelievable if I had not had the misfortune of actually seeing the pictures of it. Horrible.

If we want to be honorable conservatives,
it would be wrong to engage in name-calling (and it was wrong for Peters to do so) and better to talk Peters off the ledge, explaining why orthodox Islam and redical clerics are a serious danger to an extent that Peters might not understand.

Peters column:
http://www.nypost.com/seven/09072006/postopinion/opedcolumnists/islam_haters__an_enemy_within_opedcolumnists_ralph_peters.htm

e-mail to Taranto about his endorsement of Peters
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/006372.html

Jihadwatch response:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/013032.php

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.