Islam has NOT been hijacked by terrorists. Islam was violent in its most primitive form: the actions of the prophet. The prophet ordered dissenters killed in his name and the name of his deity. The prophet is the source of both totalitarian Islam and Islamic terrorist violence.
The hijacking of Islam, if there is any, is that of the western politicians who continue the lie of Islam as a religion of peace. It is not, it never was, not even in the day of the prophet. Killing apostates, heretics, and other dissenters (say Jews, for example) is part of the Islamic religious dogma, part of the culture of Muhammad.
The claim that Islam is the religion of peace is an attempt to mollify and appease domestic Muslims and keep them from grabbing their bombs and AKs and going into full-blown war in the heart of western countries. "Religion of peace" is a rhetorical counter-measure that flies in the face of actual government practice of spying on mosques,
demonstrating the government recognition of Islam as the source and sustenance of violence.
The Leftist western governments both love and fear their Muslims. They love the Muslim hatred of their common enemy, Judeo-Christianity (Crusades, after all). They fear Muslims for their irrational volatility and unrestrained violent barbarism, which is hardly hidden beneath the transparent veneer of sanctioned lies, dissembly and excuses thrown out by Muslims (all part of the defense of the morally indefensible prophet).
Because both Progressivism and Islam are are totalitarian, they will hold hands until the enemy is no longer a threat. They will, together, purge their enemies in "the pursuit of peace and to rise from their own victimhood". Then they will try to victimize each other.
Unless the rational freedom-lovers can stop them. As Giuliani said, an enemy which is not properly identified can't be defeated. The terrorist barbarians are Islamic; that must be established and owned.
Update:
This: The hate whose name they dare not speak.
And this:
Wartime admiral: Obama is 'anti-American, pro-Islamic'Well, it's not masquerading as such; it is a religion which is totalitarian in the sense of theocracy by terror and barbarism.
“A retired four-star admiral who commanded the U.S. Pacific Fleet during several Middle East flare ups is charging that President Obama’s strategy in the area is 'anti-American' and instead 'pro-Islamic.'
...
'The Obama administration has a strategy. It is very simple. Any thinking American should be able to grasp it. It’s anti-American, anti-Western, it’s pro-Islamic, pro-Iranian, and pro-Muslim Brotherhood,” he said last week at a conference hosted by the conservative Center for Security Policy where he heads the military committee.'
Lyons, in the Navy for 36 years and a critic of Obama, said the nation has to come to 'grips' with Islam as something other than a religion. 'Until you recognize that Islam is the political movement masquerading as a religion, you’re never going to come to grips with it,' he said at the conference titled the 'Defeat Jihad Summit.'"
2 comments:
"Radical" Islam IS Islam in its most fundamental and pure form. The Prophet is held to be the Perfect Model of proper Muslim behavior in everything. The Islamic principle that "later trumps earlier" in interpretive sources goes out the window when the Perfect Model comes up for discussion.
Any Muslim who does not support the jihadis is an apostate, subject to killing by the "true" Muslims (regardless of which tribe they belong to). For this reason, those who wish to peacefully coexist with infidels or "apostate" Muslims are under the threat of death from "true" Muslims. This is why there has not been (and will not be) any "modernization" or accommodation with Western notions of life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness or equality. Either you are "true" Muslim or you are under a death sentence. This is also why the "moderate" (apostate) Muslims will not take an unequivocal public stance against the barbarism of fundamentalist Islam as practiced by the Prophet. They are well aware of the risks to themselves and their families if they dare to speak out against the "holy jihad" or fail to support the Caliphate. They also are aware that the slogans "the religion of peace" and "jihad is purely a spiritual struggle" are taqiyya and kitman, used to lull the unsuspecting infidels into lowering their guard and allowing the global Caliphate to rise to power. They do NOT oppose that goal!
The problem is not external to Islam; it is an integral part of Islam from its very beginning.
It is highly amusing that Dragon fang continues to cite various Islamic sources, trying to claim that he is being "logical." No argument based in Western logic will make a dent in his religious fervor, nor bring him to an admission of the obvious contradictions.
There have been great Muslim scholars in the past who have been not only fully conversant with Western (Aristotelian) logic, but have written extensively using it and critiquing it.
Abū Ḥāmid Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad al-Ghazālī is one such scholar. It is to him that credit is given for the Kalām Cosmological Argument often utilized by Dr. William Craig Lane as one of the better philosophical proofs of the existence of God.
Avicenna (ibn Sina) is another Muslim scholar of note within Western philosophical circles.
Alas! It seems their time of influence was a thousand years ago.
Correction: that should have been Dr. William Lane Craig referenced above vis-a-vis the Kalām Cosmological Argument.
Obviously, I should fact-check better immediately following work at the midnight hour. Mea culpa and apologies to Dr. Craig.
Post a Comment