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.
Bump for later reading.
Nor am I. The only difference between misguided believer, aggressor and non combatants is time.
make that time and opportunity
"MY cousin is sweet Georgia Brown. Is that close enough?
"
Can she do a bump and grind, though? That's the real question.
That comparison hardly works to write off what Sakic was saying. Hitler's taste in coffee and his ideologies about religion are vastly different things.
Please lose that tagline, and cease the menaces in general.
The jihad is the problem. They are forcing us to kill them and to kill them in mass quantities. Sleeper cells here have to be rooted out the old fashioned way and dealt with in as peremptory a manner as permitted by law.
Bahahaha. Are we off topic or what?
Intolerance and hatred was a deep concern of our founders.
I grow concerned when I see much of it on this site.
While discussions about the religion's merit are interesting, then they degrade to condemnation, judgements and bans, we play a dangerous game and flirt with the darkest parts of human history.
I have a feeling that hijacking a thread is a safe form of hijacking here ;)
And there were Nazis who did not endorse the killing of Jews and Christians. Some were quite against such policies, yet they were Nazis nonetheless.
"I grow concerned when I see much of it on this site."
"I am not guilty of the common error of judging another by myself. I readily believe in another’s disposition that is contrary to my own. And though I find myself pledged to one particular way of life, I do not require, as many do, that others also follow it. Rather, I accept and understand a thousand different ways of living and, contrary to most men, more readily recognize differences than uniformity amongst us."----Montaigne
But, I'll be d@mned if some Islamofascist is going to force me to join his cult of murder and intolerance!
Where would the taliban and OBL be today in Afghanistan if 9/11 had not occured. This is a turning point for Islam. Had they waited just ten more years before attacking America's homeland no telling how this would have worked out. By 2011 Iran would have the bomb and would have been a great aly of the Taliban.
As happened in Europe on September 1, 1939 and at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, on September 11, 2001, a vile enemy introduced us in grisly and horrific fashion to the darkest parts of human history. The question before us now is, will we roll up our sleeves and defeat that enemy or will we surrender to it?
Please see post #588.
It does not have to come to this, but considering our wishy washy approach to damn near everything, it just might.
"Intolerance and hatred was a deep concern of our founders."
I'll be d@mned if some Islamofascist is going to force me to join his cult of murder and intolerance.
I'd say that was a inalienable right,not intolerance or hate.I've got younguns and grand-younguns and I'll be dagone if any one is going to bother them!I will not hate or intolerate,---guess the rest.
Look around FR and see if there was any "hate speech" against the muslim death cult before 9/11. People are only reacting to the evil performed by islam in the name of allah.
islam is a wolf in sheep's clothing
1 Samuel 15:3 "Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.'"
Saul did everything except kill the livestock. And yet look what happened. The children in the Middle East are trained to hate and endorse violence from the cradle to the grave. Watch any documentary on Iran/Iraq/Syria/Saudi Arabia, etc and you'll see them brainwashed..rocking back and forth crosslegged while they chant verse after verse from the Koran for hours and hours on end.
You can bet they will harbor a lifelong grudge against the evil West (great Satan) for killing their parents, brothers, friends, etc etc. In any event, I agree 100% with your comments.
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.