In a recent column at Townhall.com, Frank Pastore ably recapitulates all of the usual mistaken thinking on Islam:
Last Monday on the Fox hit "24", President Wayne Palmer made the point that American Muslims are our best allies in this war against Islamic terrorism. He’s right, but you wouldn’t know it listening to the callers on my show last week. I’m still disturbed by the volume of criticism I got–especially from Christians–for merely suggesting something that seems so obvious to so many of us: that we are not at war against the religion of Islam, we are at war against radical Muslims.Callers insisted I was wrong, repeating over and over again things like, "there is no such thing as moderate Islam, there are only moderate Muslims who don’t really understand Islam," that "real Islam, and therefore real Muslims, seek world domination, a 7th century caliphate under universal sharia law," and finally, that "a true Muslim believes all non-Muslims must either convert or die."
Jihad Watch callers maybe?
Could they be right? What would counter-evidence look like to defeat these claims? Let me offer a few suggestions.1) There are tens of millions of Muslims and Christians (and Jews) who have lived peaceably alongside one another for centuries, and who still do today in many parts of the world.
Indeed, that is at least nominally true, though the harmoniousness of their historical coexistence is usually exaggerated. And the obvious cases of coexistence are invariably situations in which Muslims ruled others and not the other way around, or when Muslim minorities were so small they were rendered innocuous.
2) Who is in a better position to explain the "true" teachings of Islam, a Muslim or a non-Muslim?
Perhaps someone could inform Mr Pastore about taqiyya.
Jesus taught you can always tell a tree by its fruit. Better to judge actions than to divine motives.
Do the centuries of jihad waged on three continents - in which, according to Bill Warner of the Center for the Study of Political Islam, the number of victims tops a quarter of a billion - count as "actions"? Muhammad's beheading of the Quraiza tribe? The Armenian Genocide? 9/11?
3) Moreover, since religions don’t war against one another people do, we’ve got to find out who speaks for what religion to determine if "we are at war with Islam."
A fair question. Muhammad and the Koran I think speak pretty authoritatively. Perhaps Mr Pastore could look into them. May I suggest he start with the Sira, p 208 of the Oxford edition?
4) If "we are at war with Islam,” then what would victory look like? The "defeat" of Islam?
Now this is a bit more interesting and it reflects a different sort of prejudice. The sad fact is that there will be no "victory" in the conventional sense of that term; no peace treaty signed on the deck of the USS Missouri. But while there will be no victory, there could certainly be a defeat - of the West.
5) Living proof that "we" are not at war with all Muslims are the Muslims who are part of that "we."
Mr Pastore here makes a simple semantic maneuver: he was talking about Islam, now he is talking about Muslims. But a nominal Muslim - i.e., one who is a Muslim in name only - does not represent the teachings of his religion any more than a nominal Christian. Because many Christians fail to love their neighbor hardly means that Christianity is about NOT loving people.
6) Lastly, of the many things it means to be an American, it certainly means that you will fight for the political right of your neighbor to be theologically wrong–that’s the Constitution. An American believes that you can be any religion–or no religion–that you choose, as long as you don’t try to legitimize an immoral act in the name of your religion, such as polygamy, temple prostitution, or illicit drug use.
First, Islam explicitly sanctions polygamy (Muhammad had eleven; Muslims are limited to four). Second, if fighting for the right of others "to be theologically wrong" makes an American, the Koranic injunctions to slay unbelievers, pillage their wealth, and suppress their religions certainly renders Islam un-American.
People such as Mr Pastore should ask themselves: Do they hold to their belief that Islam is benign because of their in-depth knowledge of the subject? Or because the opposite would be too uncomfortable to accept?
Frank Pastore makes the point at the end: "Let’s make the distinction from now on: We are not at war with Islam, but at war with radicals doing evil in the name of Islam."
I think this is a very good point. I've known many Muslims who are NOT violent, are NOT fascists, and do not wish think of non-Muslims as infidels.
Secondly, Irshad Manji is a Canadian-Muslim woman who has written a book about what is wrong with Islam and how it can be fixed. She receives death threats on a regular basis because she wants to reform Islam.
We are not at war with Islam. We are not at war with Muslims. We are at war with evil people who do evil things in the name of God and behind the shield of religion.
10s of millions of Mohammedans living peacefully blah blah blah.
Item 1:
Fourteen tens of millions is still only 10% of all Mohammedans. 2 tens of millions is only 1.4%.
Think about what those OTHERS are like.
Item 2:
When outnumbered as in the US (until VERY recently) they operate in the Meccan mode of the Mohammedan duality. In Mecca originally Mohammed was so outnumbered he could not resort to military action. So he lived peacefully with but self-segregated from the others people in Mecca.
10s of millions live under those circumstances.
When not vastly outnumbered Mohammedans are expected to operate in the Medinan mode of the Mohammedan duality, militant jihad and war. We see that happening all over the world today, Somalia, Lebanon, Malaysia, Indonesia, Southern Philippines, Thailand, and so forth. 10s of millions of "polite" Mohammedans still leaves a billion or so impolite Mohammedans.
Think about the numbers. Is it time to do something about it?
If Mr.Pastore is sincere in his expressed desire to find answers to his questions, he need only log on to this site... if this is too polotically incorrect for him, then might I suggest seeking the answers to his queries in any of the multitude of scholars on this topic... such as Ibn Warraq, Robert Spencer, Ayaan Hersi Ali, Steven Emerson, Nonie Darwish, Walid Shoebat, ECT... Because Mr.Pastore, YOU realy need to get a clue!!!
Pastore,
1. What part of jihad (holy war) do you not understand?
2. What is your litmus test for distinguishing "moderate muslims" from "radical muslims?" Delineate for us how this differs from non-observant muslims and pious muslims.
3. Were not all 19 9-11 satanic, cult-of-deathist muslims "peaceful muslims" prior to the sneak attack rivaling Pearl Harbor?
Love to hear from you and your deeply religious informed perspective.
Well done Greg.
Mr Pastore hasn't a clue about Islam. Muslims come in all different flavors, but they are all still Muslims.
Yeah, Nazism was not the problem it was those radical Nazis like Hitler, Göbbels, Eichmann, and all the other Nazis in power.
Who is in a better position to explain the "true" teachings of Islam, a Muslim or a non-Muslim? Mr. Pastore writes.
I agree. I used to think that bin-Laden and crew were a tiny minority of extremists.
Now that I have read the Koran and Hadith and the early biographies of Muhamed, I realize that he and other terrorists were not pulling their commentary out of thin air, unfortunately.
I also see how groups like CAIR run for cover and dissemble and how my Muslim friends shut down all debate-- even at the neutral/critical lever where other religious systems are completely open for discussion even by the staunchest adherents.
A Moslem is a Moslem is a Moslem.
The descriptions such as moderate, nominal--in name only, financial supporter of jihad, passive jihadist, active jihadist, are ours, not how they view themselves as a superior "culture."
Moslems must be removed from the non-Moslem population, and Islamic countries quarantined, if we want to start winning this war.
This will happen, in spite of the government, media, and bleeding-heart fellow-travelers. It will not be pleasant nor pretty. It is, however, preferable to being subjugated by Islam with its sharia and cultural barbarism.
dear readers
islam has never been a problem to anyone. If you can understand the intent of the al quran perhaps you can see.
For a start you may wish to see something interesting here at
http://al-gazzali.blogspot.com
for better understanding of the message
peace to u all
gazzali
Gazzali,
What is the intent of the 9th Sura?
For starts.
Who is in a better position to explain the "true" teachings of Islam, a Muslim or a non-Muslim? Mr. Pastore writes.
Who was in a better position to explain the true teachings of Nazism, a Nazi or an inmate at Treblinka, Aushwitz or the Warsaw Ghetto? Mr. Pelayo writes.
While I don't rule out a defeat - certainly if the majority of populations of Western countries stay in their multiculturalist stupor, I think this is a needlessly pessimistic scenario. Of course there can be a victory, just as there was between 1989 to 1991 - the fall of the Berlin Wall to the democratization of Eastern Europe to the collapse of the Soviet Union. All this was tough to imagine even in 1988; similarly, something like a majority of people outside the Arab world, say Indonesia, Iran, et al at some point revolting and apostatizing en mass could be a major turning point. Similarly, if a day comes when initially all non-Arab countries shed Islam, followed by the Arabs to varying degrees at various points, there can definitely be a victory.
We'll know a victory when we see it. Islam will not exist, or will at least have < 100m adherents worldwide. That may happen peacefully as a result of mass revolts and conversions, and with no bloodshed; it may happen as a result of a good portion of dar-ul-Islam being bombed as a result of starting a war. Nonetheless, when we see Islam either disappear as an acceptable ideology from the face of the earth, or alternatively, heavily reduced, we'll know that we've won.
This seems to be the juiciest part, unfortunately Spencer didn't comment on it:
Living proof that "we" are not at war with all Muslims are the Muslims who are part of that "we." Take, for exam-ple, Dr. Zuhdi Jasser who is founder of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy (www.aifdemocracy.org), an organization committed to "demonstrating the synergy of American democracy and its founding principles with the religion of Islam." Jasser is a former U.S. Navy Lieutenant Commander in the Medical Corps, who now lives in Phoenix where he is in private practice specializing in internal medicine and nuclear cardiology. Jasser believes one can be a Muslim who loves Allah, who can follow the teachings of Mohammed and, at the same time, be an American who loves his country, who can swear allegiance to defend our Constitution unto death, and who believes in the principles of the Declaration of Inde-pendence. He is living proof of each of these. Are we at war with this good doctor who is seeking a reformation within Islam? Does he not know his Koran sufficiently? Does he not understand sharia law or the true meaning of jihad? Yes, he knows these things. Dr. Jasser is just one of millions of American-loving Muslims, each living proof my critics are wrong.
Go ahead and knock yourself out, Frankie Pastore! Explain to us -or let your Muhammedan understander of Islam- friend explain how he puts fire & water all in bucket and mixes it...
I'm dying to know: Thousands of inquiring Jihad Watching minds want to know!
http://sheikyermami.com/2007/02/11/monkeys-pigs-get-along-nicely/
I wonder if people who romanticize life for the Jews in Muslim Spain would agree to the following statement--all historically true (with a lot left out).
Free African Americans lived and prospered in the American South from the time of the founding of the colonies, through the Civil Car and until the present time.
Particularly in New Orleans and in North Carolina, free men of color owned property (including slaves) created social registars, wrote books, built successful businesses and were educated at the finest institutions, some of which they established and endowed themselves.
In general, the economic life for free blacks in the antebellum American South was on par or superior to almost all other black people in the world and most whites as well.
No, no one would make that argument (in public) and for good reason.
"dear readers
islam has never been a problem to anyone....."
gazzali"
that made me laugh so hard coffee nearly came out of my nose! thanks for the good joke this early in the morn :D
Mr.Spencer says: "But a nominal Muslim - i.e., one who is a Muslim in name only - does not represent the teachings of his religion"
Hmmmm... So in your view a muslim who bears witness that there is no god but God and Muhammad is His last prophet, establishes the prayer, gives zakat, performs hajj, and fasts during Ramadan is only a muslim only "in name" but a muslim who kills innocent people (including his own people), rapes, marries 4 year old's, and sends death threats is a real muslim?
Seriously, what I realized about this site is that it's full of a bunch of ultra right-wingnuts whose history for them began at 8:46 AM 11/9/2001. You people talk about how genocidal and evil Islam is, but at the same time you support the illegal war on Iraq (a war which costed more then 500,000 innocent lifes). Are you seeing your hypocrisy?
You people are no different then the radical muslims you keep complaining about. You're the most genocidal little fu**s I have ever seen.
"Last Monday on the Fox hit "24", President Wayne Palmer made the point that American Muslims are our best allies in this war against Islamic terrorism."
I don't know about the rest of you, but to me this fictional President doesn't have a very good score card. His attitudes have gotten one nuke set off in America and more on the way. Not to mention all the mall and subway bombings.
Quoting him as an example of clear thinking is not clear thinking.
I wonder who this fellow is trying to convince? Himself?
If your teenager were experimenting with a drug that would addict or kill them 'only a tiny minority of the time' would you let them have at it?
The whole issue is a matter of trust. While I am happy for folks such as Ms. Majid who is trying to bring about reform in Islam and I wish her all the best, the truth is that in this one question, just who is a peaceful Muslim?
Approximately 270 million nonbelievers died over the last 1400 years for the glory of political Islam. These are the Tears of Jihad which are not taught in any school.
In Africa over 120 million Christians and animists have died over the last 1400 years of jihad
I reckon far more than 270 million infidels have been slaughtered at the hands of Islam over those last 1,400 years.
And but for the likes of Martel, Sobieski, and those who took part in the Reconquista, it would have been far higher - even far higher than the number I reckon it to be.
WAT_123 says "You people are no different then the radical muslims you keep complaining about. You're the most genocidal little fucks I have ever seen".
And you are worse than a 'useful idiot' to the Islamic warmongers. At least a useful idiot is often gullible and misguided. That can't be said about you. You hate our civilization every bit as much as the Bin Ladens of this world. Your sort are their enablers. Your sort are the folks who skulk behind the bodies of those who have given, and still continue to give their lives for you to live in freedom, over the centuries.
WAT_123:
Your double comment is full of erroneous assumptions.
First, I am not the author of the above post, as you might have noticed. Greg Davis is. He can speak for himself, but I thought I would note that your powers of observation leave something to be desired. Especially since we have written volumes at this site, for years now, against the war in Iraq (which is not in any case genocidal).
Anyway, as to your central point, of course "a muslim who bears witness that there is no god but God and Muhammad is His last prophet, establishes the prayer, gives zakat, performs hajj, and fasts during Ramadan" is a real Muslim. Our concern here is for the warrant from the Qur'an and Sunnah that a Muslim who "kills innocent people (including his own people), rapes, marries 4 year old's, and sends death threats" brings in support of his actions. Please provide a specific Islamic refutation for these appeals to Islamic authority by the mujahedin, and evidence for a mainstream orthodox sect or madhhab that renounces violence against unbelievers etc. and teaches that Muslims must not dominate but live with unbelievers as equals, and I will publicize it.
As for your other points, please note also that it is the Islamic clerics of Pakistan who are protesting the country's new Western-style rape law on Islamic grounds. (See, for example, http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=35905) Please explain why these clerics have their religion wrong.
As for innocent people, please provide also an Islamic argument that counters the mujahedin's contention that people in America, Israel and elsewhere are kafir harbi, and thus are not innocent and have no protection.
As for marrying 4-year-olds and issuing death threats, I trust you will acknowledge that child marriage is common in some Muslim countries due to the example of Muhammad's marriage to Aisha. According to Bukhari (http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/062.sbt.html#007.062.064 ), as I'm sure you know, she was nine when the marriage was consummated. And death threats, too, have sanction in Muhammad's call for the killing of Kab bin Ashraf, Abu Afak, and Asma bint Marwan. Please provide an Islamic argument for why Muhammad should not be imitated in this particular.
I look forward to your information on these matters.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
Wow!
Wat123
We sure got you excited! How hard did you have to bang on the keyboard to post that many times?
Perhaps if you slow down, take a chill pill. You could share with us what kind of pacifists you expected to find on a site like Jihad Watch?
As far as I know the score for killing by Jihadwatchers is 0.
Muslims, on the other hand, have a slightly higher score. Three hundred million and counting.
Of course we have to count all the Muslims killed in Iraq BY MUSLIMS!
WAT_123
I believe the tide is turning among well-read and thoughtful people who hate bigotry in all forms and in particular are noticing and beging to formulate resistance to the 1,400 year pattern of expantionary Islam. Thus, an Imam on the Hannity show cannot shut down hard questioning with peaceful sounding rhetoric. Secondly, and in reference to you, you should enjoy your last moments of being able to shut down critical thinking of Islam and responses in the West to protect our institutions with some tantrum about being as bad as the jihadists and preaching genocide. In short time, that fraudulant accusation will have no impact on how thoughtful people in the West proceed to protect themselves. No body I know wants to kill Muslims wholesale and most, such as myself, are still trying to think of ways we can all just get along-- without letting Sharia creep into our lives.
Hopefully, Dar al Islam will not use a nuke before we`ve had the chance to deal with this as peacefully as we can.
Oh, by the way, muslims do not get along with each other...There is no muslim country that has lived peacefully with its neighbor for even ten years during the past 1400 years. islam is all about war. there is war between the sexes, war between shia and sunni, and war between the house of islam and the non-muslims, who are called in the koran the house of war.
Now, if we comprise the house of war, and jihad is called for against us wherever they find us, please tell me how you peaceniks want to go about changing their ideas. You are living in a fantasy. You will be the first ones to complain when we do not defend you. You live on the supposed good will of an enemy...You are idiots.
Please watch this short, two-minute video and you will see the way they settle things....if we do not yell at them and shout them down, they will never listen to us...this is a true picture of how they believe the truth should be defended, and if this had not been on TV, it would have ended in the death of one or both....when are my fellow Americans going to pull your heads out of the sand?
Indira Ghandi said, "You cannot shake hands with a closed fist."
http://switch5.castup.net/frames/20041020_MemriTV_Popup/video_480x360.asp?ai=214&ar=1347wmv&ak=null
When witnessing to a muslim, this is how it must be done because they DO NOT RECOGNIZE anything less as accompanying the truth.
Unfortunately we are at war with islam, which is inherently evil.
Irshad Manjit either fools herself or is trying to fool us: I heard her say on Beck's program how 'shocked' and 'outraged' "we" all were at 9/11.
This is nonsense.
muslims were not shocked and outraged at 9/11.
They were delighted. They danced in the streets of Gaza and in Vancouver and Toronto.
She's working the wrong side of the street.
Go try and fool someone else.
WAT_123,
The truth is that websites like JW/DW are a needed public service in this world war, WW IV.
Unfortunately it is far too uncomfortable for most of the establishment to accept.
Question for Greg and other JW who believe all Muslims are evil:
What do we do about Tashbih Sayyed, a muslim JW member?
Or the British Muslim soldiers?
Are they all Masters of Taqqiya?
I know my post will be deleted very quickly because it asks unconfortable questions (unlike calling for the forced deportation of "muslims") but maybe a few JW will get to see it and comment
megncali,
You know , I wish it were true that we are at war with evil people who shield themselves with religion. But if you dig deeper on this website, as well as read books by Greg Davis (the poster above) and Robert Spencer, who has studied Islam for 20 years or so, you will realize the evil we have to fight is rooted in Islam itself. The God of the Qu'ran is a bloodthirsty deity, and very different from the God of the Bible or Torah. I have heard enough Friday sermons in mosques to know that there is no such thing as the Golden Rule, which is rooted in the Gospels. Believers are told all the time that Muslims are to be treated kindly but not the kuffar (that would be the rest of us). There are so many verses in the Qu'ran that call for unbelievers to submit to Islam, become second-class citizens if they refuse to convert, or die fighting the believers. After the proof presented by Mr. Spencer and the rest of Jihad Watch, I cannot help but conclude that the true Muslims are those who support jihad, and try to emulate their wretched prophet.
Don't be surprised if other posters get pissed off at you. They don't take s*** from anyone, even someone who is genuinely uninformed.
Pureevil,
Your assumption that "Greg and other JW who believe all Muslims are evil" is tendentious. Who says that Greg and other JW believe "all Muslims are evil"? Fine, there may be a "tiny, tiny minority" (sound familiar?) of people who believe "all Muslims are evil", but not the majority of rational thinkers.
Also note, there is a difference between stating "All Muslims are evil" vs stating that the Koran or the hadith, etc, are problematic (or to use harsher language, have, to non-Muslims, elements within them that sound "evil"). Ok? to condemn an interpretation of the Koran as "evil" is NOT the same as to state: "all Muslims are evil."
Next, off topic, did anyone catch Glenn Beck the other night and his interview with Manji? She stated that so-called "moderate" Muslims are part of the problem -- they are complicit with the radicals because they refuse to speak out. Does that make "All Muslims are evil?" answer: "obviously, not." It simply illustrates the problem. Manji's solution was to suggest that rather than characterize the debate as between "moderates" and "radicals" (which is not helpful in her opinion -- she sounded like Robert Spencer on this one) -- but to suggest the differences are between "reformers" vs the rest. And, there are Muslims who want to reform the interpretations of the Koran. (I also noticed that Glenn Beck seems to also be having second-thoughts about the "moderate" Muslim label...a while back I noticed an attitude change -- I believe his position is hardening -- and I wonder if this has anything to do with the death threats and the abject silence from the so-called moderates...) (Also, Fjordman has criticized Manji -- but, you know, when you see her in person -- she's such a vibrant, energetic, optimistic person, a spark plug, that she's very likeable -- her writing might sound dry or uninspired, but it's the exact opposite if you hear her speak in person or in an actual interview.)
Great reading Greg! I hope to see more in the future. This site is the pinnacle of theory and thought on the Islamic threat. No other site is really like it for pure to the point Islam.
Call it Strategy of Islam 101 for non-muslims.
None better...
Mr. Spencer's response to WAT_123 might have also included the many injunctions in Islam that make clear that those who do not participate in jihad or aid it in some way are basically hypocrites. There is a good reason that martyrs who die in jihad go straight to the front of the line for paradise. That fact reflects the importance of jihad in Islam (and no - we're not talking about an inner spiritual struggle here). So while it is true that "a muslim who bears witness that there is no god but God and Muhammad is His last prophet, establishes the prayer, gives zakat, performs hajj, and fasts during Ramadan" is indeed a true Muslim - the fact is that in Islam he is not the BEST Muslim. In Islam that honor goes to the jihadi:
http://www.memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Area=sd&ID=SP82004
"4) If "we are at war with Islam,” then what would victory look like? The "defeat" of Islam?"
The answer of victory or defeat is ideological and not militarily. Until Islamic Jihad calls off domination of non-Muslim believers, no victory is possible. They would have to call for a new interpretation of their holy texts to disavow Mohammed's commands to war against 'unbelievers' by confessing such commands no longer apply to the modern world, and belong strictly within the confines of a 7th century ideology no longer relevant. This is tantamount to a 'reformation' of the Quran and ahahith into something they are not, peaceful teachings for a modern age in Islam. Until such is voiced by proponents of the Islamic faiths, both Sunni and Shia, that there is no longer a dar-al-harb distinction from dar-al-Islam, then no such victory can be claimed. Islamic war against the modern world is a war between modern civilization and a primitive 7th century philosophy of religious war, what the so called 'extremists' have revived in the 21st century after three centuries of dormancy. This 1350 years long 'holy war' of Islam against the non-Muslim world never ended, and cannot end until they call it off by confessing their primitive ideology is no longer current. All we can do for now is containment, which includes monitoring their hatred teachings at their mosques, closing down madrassas, curtailment of Muslim immigration into our lands, and the use of force to destroy their violent cells of Jihad. This is firstly an ideological war, one in which defeat is not an option, and reformation within Islam the only victory acceptable to the modern world. Otherwise, the war is on, and it cannot end until either Islamic Jihad is destroyed, or they give it up.
This film is about a terror plot in North America. The film explores ideas, such as; western foreign policy is the motivator, jihadists use the Internet to recruit, and brainwashing is the method of operation.
Additional ideas can be covered in these films, such as; jihadists are literalists, they believe the Koran is the divine word of Allah, and they use chapter and verse to justify their terror.
Source: PBS
http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/canada602/video_index.html
This film is about a terror plot in North America. The film explores ideas, such as; western foreign policy is the motivator, jihadists use the Internet to recruit, and brainwashing is the method of operation.
Additional ideas can be covered in films, such as; jihadists are literalists, they believe the Koran is the divine word of Allah, and they use chapter and verse to justify their terror.
Source: PBS
http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/canada602/video_index.html
It's great to hear many people aren't as naive as Pastore. It's taking a while but more and more are opening their eyes and just can't deny the facts about how dangerous Islam really is. In Australia we get the same reaction on the radio any time the subject of yet another Islam-inspired outrage is discussed. People aren't stupid. We refuse to believe the BS that twits like Pastore above keep regurgitating. Normal human beings go by what they see. Evidence. Not the fairy tales spun by spineless, self-loathing Islam-appeasers. You just can't believe that BS anymore. As each atrocity happens, as each lie is said by Muslims about their war-cult, more and more people are finding they just can't go along with the propaganda of peaceful Islam anymore.
"Moderate" Muslims are moderate in action only. But they support the "extremists" all the way. These "moderates" are the PR machine. The front desk. The glossy tourist brochure. They are just as dangerous since they seem to do a pretty good job of fooling suckers like Pastore and all the others like him.
"Islam" is at war with the world, we the non muslims have been under attack by islam for over 1,400 years! so if we decide to label our attackers, and learn their doctrine, are we then evil? is it not a basic human right to defend our way of life and liberty from a cult that wants to dominate the world that has no respect for non muslims and women. There are not many here that label all muslim people as bad, but we do know that islam is EVIL! anyone who tries to defend this cult of death will go insane. so for all those muslims who are allowed to reason, chose life and love and leave islam while you can.
From an email I received:
The Peaceful Majority
I used to know a man whose family was German aristocracy prior to World
War Two. They owned a number of large industries and estates. I asked
him how many German people were true Nazis, and the answer he gave has
stuck with me and guided my attitude toward fanaticism ever since.
"Very few people were true Nazis "he said," but many enjoyed the return
of German pride, and many more were too busy to care. I was one of those
who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. So, the majority just
sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew it, they owned us,
and we had lost control, and the end of the world had come. My family
lost everything I ended up in a concentration camp and the Allies
destroyed my factories."
We are told again and again by "experts" and "talking heads" that Islam
is the religion of peace, and that the vast majority of Muslims just
want to live in peace.
Although this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely
irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and
meant to somehow diminish the specter of fanatics rampaging across the
globe in the name of Islam. The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at
this moment in history.
It is the fanatics who march. It is the fanatics who wage any one of 50
shooting wars worldwide. It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter
Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking
over the entire continent in an Islamic wave. It is the fanatics who
bomb, behead, murder, or honor kill. It is the fanatics who take over
mosque after mosque. It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning
and hanging of rape victims and homosexuals. The hard quantifiable fact
is that the "peaceful majority" is the "silent majority" and it is cowed
and extraneous.
Communist Russia comprised Russians who just wanted to live in peace,
yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20
million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant. China 's huge
population was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill
a staggering 70 million people.
The average Japanese individual prior to World War 2 was not a
warmongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across
South East Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic
murder of 12 million Chinese civilians; most killed by sword, shovel,
and bayonet. And, who can forget Rwanda , which collapsed into butchery.
Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans were "peace loving"?
History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for all our
powers of reason we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of
points:
Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence.
Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don't speak up,
because like my friend from Germany , they will awake one day and find
that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun.
Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs
Afghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, and many
others have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until it
was too late.
As for us who watch it all unfold; we must pay attention to the only
group that counts; the fanatics who threaten our way of life.
Credit where credit is due:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=21447
J.S. Your comments about Manji and how she wants to shift the focus from the current dichotomy of "moderates" vs "extremists" to "reformers" vs "the rest", demonstrates that she is well aware that the moderates are merely the silent, nonparticipating, non-practicing Muslims but that ideologically they are not actually different from the extremists in terms of what Islam actually IS. As has been said here ad nauseum, the moderates at best are merely non-practicing Muslims - or let's say "selectively-practicing" Muslims. But for Islam to be fundamentally different from what it IS in totality, it requires "reform". That's what she appears to be saying. And that means the "reformers" are not at all the same thing as the "moderates". I think virtually everyone here would agree with that assessment of the situation (although various amongst us might disagree with Manji on the actual realistic prospects of reform or at least the timetable for that occurring).
One of the very best responses to Pastore's article (IMO) is this, by Charles Martel (who also posts here occasionally):
Charles Martel writes: Sunday, February, 11, 2007 3:57 AM
Where you are wrong, sir
Someone above has stated that wars take many forms. In this, I would most wholeheartedly agree. However, Islam, in its 1400 year history, has, unlike any other religion (even taking lefist views of the Crusades and the Inquisition into account) is based on violence. In its textual foundation, in historical founding, in the life of the one man considered to be a perfect example of the living faith of Islam - Mohammed . . . it is an intolerant faith that actually exhorts its followers to take neither friend nor worker from the ranks of the unbelievers.
Islam is also a faith that allows for the practice of lying to non-believers in order to confuse them and obfuscate the truth of Islam in order to protect the believers. Islam is, in the recorded words of the sole source of its founding, Mohammed, a faith of death and subjugation through force if through no other means. That is why the Islamic worldview sees the world split in two: the House of Islam, and the House of War.
There are so-called "moderate" Muslims who do not pick up a gun. A fair number of these may emotionally/ideologically/financially support those that do. We see these men down the road from my house at UCI all the time. We see them in the streets of New York, trampling the US flag, in Dearborn, even in Oklahoma City, where a man was kicked out of his mosque for having the temerity to criticize bin Laden, a fellow Muslim, to non-believers.
Many others may not even do that, and may actually abhor the violence perpetrated in the name of Islam. This number, though, no matter how strong, really has no voice. And this is because they know, whether they follow the dictates of their faith or not, or even if they think that those dictates commanding violence are wrong, that THEY ARE STILL THERE - THEY ARE A PART OF THE VERY FABRIC OF ISLAM ITSELF.
There are non-Orthodox Jews, who don't practice the literal faith of their own texts, but still call themselves practicing Jews. Yet, over time, there is an ebb and flow into Orthodox Judaism as various members of succeeding generations "rediscover" the more traditional roots of their faith. The same is true for Islam. However, that more "orthodox" view is one that is of a tone set by Mohammed himself - one of violence, intolerance, and death.
Even in so-called moderate Islamic nations, it is still illegal to carry or wear any paraphenalia or literature that can be identified as religious and non-Muslim. Wearing a cross in public in Saudi Arabia can certainly get you arrested, even as a non-citizen. No theft or murder required - just wearing a cross. This is Saudi Arabia - not Taliban-era Afghanistan.
Non-Muslims in Muslim countries can't preach their own faith, they can't repair their houses of worship or build new ones. If their children are forcibly converted to Islam, there is nothing they can do.
Yes, Christian and Jewish communities have existed for hundreds of years in Muslim countries. Ever-dwindling communities, always looking to escape. Communities that live in constant fear. Communities that, during those same "peaceful" centuries could be the victims of random, hate-filled violence from Muslim gangs. After the 16th century, the warfare on non-believers wasn't always open warfare, though it was at times. More often, however, it was a war of attrition. Muslims would breed them out, force them out, or "convert" them out.
The first crusades weren't from the Roman Catholics, they were Muslim crusades, as Muslims swept through what is called Palestine, across North Africa, and into Spain, destroying centuries old Christian communities along the way. The carnage that ensued wasn't as bad as what the nations to the East, like Pakistan and India, experienced.
After conquest, there would be periods of peace (due largely to the integration of many Muslims into the foreign cultures). But the violence, as stated before, was cyclical. Calls would go out for the enforcement of the dhimmi laws and the various taxes levied against the non-believers. Homes would burn, stores looted, etc. The violence wasn't always ordered in a centralized fashion, nor was it always organized. But it never went away.
What you also fail to recognize is the Islam recognizes no law - including the Constitution - above that of the laws that comprise Shari'a. Any Muslim who does so is not following his own faith. A Muslim not following his own faith is fine - in this country, at least, he has a choice. However, the root cause of the violence - the textual and historical foundation of the arguments for violence in Islam - are still there.
For Islam to be able to rid itself of this root, it would have to excise itself of large portions of both the Koran and all four major versions of the Hadith, as well as many histories of Mohammed (such as Ibn Ishaq). No matter what I think of Islam, I can understand a Muslim's refusal to do this - it could only completely invalidate any rational reason for being a Muslim in the first place.
So, what to do? Either destroy your own religion, or simply refuse to follow its commandments. This is a horrible position for Muslims to be in, and why I don't think we are in a war with Muslims, necessarily. Only those who truly follow Islam. In any event, the root cause is there, and, like with Judaism, there will be the ebb and flow from generation to generation.
And like most cultural waves, I fear that the tide is rising, and there is not a proportional decrease in true-believers. Instead, the call to return to true Islam is finding purchase in people who truly seek to do what their faith tells them to do, resonating with people who are only given the worst of our culture. (A culture that I would agree is degenerating into the darkest, narcissistic nightmare). Their only response is predicated upon a culture that is 100% based on Islam - a faith, as pointed out before, based in violence and intolerance and death.
This is why talking won't do any good. This is why the liberal concepts of human rationality and self-centerdness fail when dealing with a mentality that isn't wrong because it is based in a religion from the 7th century, but because it is just wrong. (I know liberals love to equate antiquity of thought - as long as it is inolved with religion - with ignorance and barbarity).
If Muslims want to be seen as moderate and willing to live in our society, it is not we who should be "reaching out" to them, but they who should be standing up and openly declaring any aspect of Islam that advocates violence to be wrong. They shouldn't hide behind duplicitous, CAIR-esque proclamations of "unwarranted" violence being wrong - but name specific people and acts as evil (like bin Laden. Of course, this did get that gentleman from Oklahoma City kicked out of his mosque, at least until he apologized for citicizing a fellow Muslim in front of non-believers). It is they who should be at the forefront of exposing hoaxes and anti-Semitic propaganda, at exposing the double talk of people like Arafat and Nasrallah who say one thing in English and another in Arabic. (Anybody catch Nasrallah's admission that Iran was supplying Hezbollah with arms, training and funds, and all of it supplied through Syria, and that "everyone knows it?")
If moderate Muslims want to be taken seriously as members of this nation, they need to take a stand - clear and unambiguous - against everything people like Hamas and Hezbollah and al Qaeda, and all of the Malaysian and Asian terrorists, do.
Expecting us to kiss their rear ends to get them to do what they should already be doing is no sign that I trust.
You know, I find it interesting that when a so-called Christian bombs an abortion center or murders an abortion doctor, there is no shortage of the "right-wing Christian zealots" who'll honestly and eagerly denounce the man, and the act, for the evil that they are. Why is the "vast, vast majority" of Muslims so silent, even in this nation?
Thanks Charles, that was a wonderful post.
From a post above: "...that means the 'reformers' are not at all the same thing as the 'moderates'. I think virtually everyone here would agree with that assessment of the situation (although various amongst us might disagree with Manji on the actual realistic prospects of reform or at least the timetable for that occurring)."
Precisely, the "reformers" should not be confused with so-called "moderates." Many "moderates" just use the label (they're really radicals). I believe Manji is aware of the problem. There is to be a conference (March 4, in Florida) which will include many "apostates" including Ibn warraq -- it's to find a means to embrace liberal, secular Islam -- and that includes finding and developing competing interpretations of Koranic passages.
I think we, the non-Muslims, should wait and see how this conference goes. Let's give this a change at least. And, yes, it could fail. But, who knows? It's a first step.
should read "chance" not "change." -- sorry.
Pastore is a paid for shill coward of the Rockefeller CFR. He is too good to come out and talk to the little people and only gives audiences to select underlings like WND for statements from the mount.
He is the problem pure and simple in his policies are what creates poverty, destroys wealth, rapes "lesser" cultures for control and creates...gee hyped up Islamocommunism on a murdering rampage and then says, "Oh Islam is not all bad".
You lying boob Pastore! Your ilk chose Islam for the simple reason it has oil money to fund terrorism, millions of furious people your cushy job stole oil money for in your banking cartels created and the Saudi "schools" to teach them hate.
None of this is by accident just like the rape of Reaganite free South American states from Brazil to Venezuela turning them into communist cesspools was all your George Soros policy of destroying freedom to enslave people for your CFR and Bilderburg masters.
How Pastore sleeps at night knowing what he is part of is only something people who allowed Saddam to murder people while they got his oil money can understand...and yes that includes comrade Jimmy Carter.
From Iraq to Belarus (Russia); its is a long atrocious Journey for US
A lot has been said about how the ill planed; a disastrous and unnecessary war in Iraq should be ended. American people rejected the Neocons war policies in Iraq and as a result the conservatives were forced to leave both the houses of government, defeated and with their long faces. Although conservative clout is diminished, still the executive power with all its might and vigour, remains in tact with their President; George W Bush. He is still sticking to Neocons guns to have his go against all the odds and wishes of people.
It is said that ‘Democracy’ can deliver, what ever is decided and desired by the people; it is honoured and served by their democratic governments in its true colour and sprit. To what avail is then, American democracy; where people are getting the opposite of it and are totally being disregarded and ignored for their say? Except that, only a disappointing rhetoric is always being heard, from the offices of president; escalation of Iraq war and no retreat from Iraq or Afghanistan.
What is all this about? What is at stake and what are the hindrances that even the earnest desire of people is being ignored. The situation demands that we need to strike the right cord to dig down and reach for the truth.
This may require us to explore that here; it is a big game called Pax Americana in play. Pax Americana has its long term set goals to attain American global dominance by means of ‘escalating and maintaining of espionage and covert operations’ around the world. It is step by step, acquisition of lucrative lands, rich in world energy resources to full fill the hegemonic and American imperialistic designs. The prime target for the planned American century of Imperialism is to subjugate people and acquire their natural resources of rich lands situated in the Middle East, Iran and Afghanistan, in the Islamic lands of Central Asia, the Baltic region, and the countries under direct influence of Russia i.e. Georgia, Lithuania and Belarus. It is an enormous grand task for the crafty think tanks of United States, to plan and execute it for next many, many years to come. The think tanks like Neocons are busy as ever, carving the divisive policies to spread fallacy and create the webs of deceit to full fill their dream plans.
It started long before conservative came into power and occupied the offices in Washington. It was all going well till the time, Soviet Union was defeated by the US proxies’ warriors, Mujahideen in Afghan war and Russian Empire collapsed. Resultant; United States became the sole super power in the world. The proven, proud warriors of Afghan war, Mujahideen were given free hand in Afghanistan to establish their own government with the financial grants from US and to eliminate the remnants of Russian influenced groups like Northern Alliance. They were also expected to carry out further escalations of war and take the fight inside the breakaway Russian states to ensure their further fragmentation. This will make the task for US easy for further exploitation of these fragile states at later stage.
It was an exceptionally smart US plan that they made Mujahideen, a devout Muslim force raised in the name of Jihad and to fight, in the name of Islam to dislodge an atheist occupier; Soviet Union, from an Islamic country- Afghanistan. This covert plan was serving American cause so well, that it can be graded as the most successful and unique covert operation ever conducted by a proxy in the world so successfully. On the other hand, Islamic forces were also very glad that they were using, a super power’s resources, her tactics, weaponry and technology which they otherwise could never have laid their hands on. Saudi Arabia and Pakistan were the major players to come forward and lay their all possible resources and man power, gathered from all around the Muslim World and conduct this supposedly a ‘sacred war’. Pakistan holds a pillar like position in the entire conduct of Afghan war. It was an atrocious war for Muslim fighters but it was progressing in leaps and bounds and was gaining much advances in return, toward 'Pan Islamic' goals. Goals to free all the subjugated Islamic states of Central Asia from Soviet Union and secure carve a strong Islamic block on the planet. ‘Grand Islamic Block’ extending from Western Sahara to Eastern Africa, to Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan; to all the Islamic states of Baltic Region, to Bosnia and Turkey; all located around a major hub of Middle Eastern countries. A fascinating dream to come true and the formation of an Islamic super block was in sight. The block rich and full of world energy and economic resources.
After the collapse of Soviet Union; there was a pause, a respite in the Afghan war. All the parties got a time to evaluate their positions. There was a requirement to form a government in Afghanistan and Taliban came forward to take over. US and its allies had continued - up till now to fund the Mujahideen *** Taliban operations. On the new orders from Washington, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan agreed to further fund and support Taliban to do the subsequent jobs; to defeat the remnants of Russian-backed Northern Alliance with in Afghanistan and consolidate control over Afghanistan. From there move to destabilize the former Soviet Central Asian Republics on its borders and do the necessary work to facilitate the future exploitation by United States.
But the Taliban had failed. It did not defeat the Russian-backed Northern Alliance. Instead of subverting Central Asia in businesslike fashion, it had indulged in blowing up statues of Buddha and terrorizing people who deviate from the Taliban's super-repressive interpretation of Islam. In fact, they had given a second thought to their indulgence, to act as US proxy for her future plans. Their achievement of a victory as per their internal plan, to form a greater Muslim Block was in sight and the combined forces drawn from all over the Muslim countries, readily available at hand in Afghanistan. They wanted now to go, their own way.
At the same time, Russia was also seen moving in the 'wrong' direction, from Washington's perspective. The completely controllable Yeltsin was replaced with President Putin, who partially resisted the U.S advances. Further more China and Russia signed a mutual defence pact. And despite immense European/U.S. pressure, Russian President Putin refused to be kicked around. This is the time that former Mujahideen commanders like Mullah Omer and Osama bin Laden emerged as self styled leaders at the international scene to resist US influence in the Muslim World… and Alqaeda took a birth.
Just like the well laid out plans of mice, (of Tom and Jerry character); Neocons plans as of mice had gone awry. This made the Neocons desperate and that is why the US decided to start moving furiously… to attack its monstrous creation—Taliban. Muslim extremism in form of jihad was utilised by US earlier in Afghan war and why not; it could be used again as policy weapon now.
The think tanks of Neocons were able to bring forth a new divisive plan build around the Al Qaeda declared intensions to resist US activities in and around Middle East. Accordingly US instigated Alqaeda to fell in ‘well laid trap’ of ‘Global war on terror’. (Earlier Soviet was very successfully trapped in by US covert actions and was encouraged to invaded Afghanistan and got itself plunged in a war to get defeated and meet a death of its own Empire.) The shot sighted self styled Muslim mavericks like Osama bin Laden and others fell prey to this new web of deceit and hence after, all the pre-emptive and covert operations around the world are being conducted (very conveniently) in the name of ‘Global war on terror’, against the imaginary and fearsome extremist Muslim factions like; Al Qaeda.
It’s a pity that Neocons were unable to sell such a bright covert plans to American public and are being negated. After the tragic incident of 9/11, a ‘Global war on terror’ was furiously escalated. All the allies and others were given a ruling guide line; ‘either you are with us or with the terrorist’. All along; may it be the invasion of Iraq, toppling of Saddam’s regime, the despicable conduct of consolidation plan in Iraq and tackling the hurdle of Iran; the reoccupation of Afghanistan or the NATO operations being carried out to wipe out Taliban; the going for US is very, very tough and all operations are being conducted, well to the 'letter and spirit' of the grand plan of the super power.
US took a fresh start from square one. It’s supposed to be a well laid plan. This time, it must not go awry (like the last one). The current fix up in Iraq and hope to achieve a victory, seemingly against all the odds is must; (it is being secured with great difficulty which was supposed to be a cake walk.) But the victory in Iraq is just a stepping stone and an important foot hold toward the major goals; to continue marching on the road through Iran, to Afghanistan, trekking around Turkmenistan and reaching the ultimate destination; Belarus (Russia). May it be Conservatives or Democrats in the house of power in Washington; this precious foot hold in Iraq ought not to be lost at any cost.
--------------------------------
Love for all, Hatred for none
Not according to Foehammer... http//www.foehammer.net
I'd like to agree with the approach that not all Muslim's or Islamic's are not at war, but the facts show, there was a lot of Islamic parties going on when the Towers came down in New York !
"Love for all, Hatred for none"
Posted by: A Khokar [TypeKey Profile Page] at February 11, 2007 06:54 PM
Care to quote the relevant Koranic sura on that one?
Caroline
I think that's the Ahmadiyya slogan. I know I've heard that one before.
but at the same time you support the illegal war on Iraq (a war which costed more then 500,000 innocent lifes). Are you seeing your hypocrisy?
You people are no different then the radical muslims you keep complaining about. You're the most genocidal little fu**s I have ever seen.
Posted by: WAT_123 at February 11, 2007 07:03 AM
Where did you get your figures and who said we supported the war in Iraq? We can't help it if muslims love to butcher innocent women, children and men in martyrdom operations or with bombs planted in markets and restaurants. These grotesque and barbaric practices are the main reason we're still engaged in the "illegal" war in Iraq, not that I believe we should be. I think we should leave and let them kill each other to their hearts' content. The fewer muslims in the world, the better. And if they're busy killing each other, they will be too busy to worry about the Great Satan.
Your exaggerated figure of 500,000 casualties in Iraq sounds like something the U.N. might concoct. Saddam butchered millions; are you crying for them? Don't compare us to radical muslims, or any kind of muslims. That is the ultimate insult. We are not capable of the hatred, fanaticism, intolerance, and irrationality that define the muslim psyche. We certainly are not capable of possessing these twisted perversions and considering them perfectly normal because "allah" sanctioned them in the qur'an. Thank God (the real one) that we were blessed with the ability to discern good from evil.
Here's an example of a good Muslim. Today at the gas station shopette, I was buying a 6 pack. The Paki cashier says, "The 16 ounce 6 pack is on sale. Cheaper than 12 ounce 6 pack." What a guy!
This was nice of him, but still doesn't make up for 9/11. We really shouldn't import anymore into the country until they decide what kind of, um, God, they worship.
They're becoming a huge problem in Aussie land.
Muslims have ruined every country where they have established control....Their way is flawed...
“‘Global war on terror’, against the imaginary and fearsome extremist Muslim factions”
Maybe the word “extremist” and the title of the war are incorrect, but Khokar, for the existence and nature of the enemy to be imaginary you have to excuse the evil and damaging history of the enemy. That which you portray as an innocent, friendly, and used party operated in the absence of morals for over a millennium, and can hardly be attributed anything of good or anything of use, but much of bad. So, your version of the plot, which is partially true, does not convince me that the enemy does not exist.
Dear Caroline and wrathofasma,
‘Love for all, Hatred for none’ is of course slogan of Ahmadiyya Muslim Association and undersigned feels honoured to use it as my personal signature.
(Ahmadiyya Muslim association website address is: http://www.alislam.org/)
There are three verses from Koran which come to my mind to describe the slogan in its true spirit:
Koran Chapter: 2 (Al-Baqarah) Verse : 178
“It is not righteousness that you turn your faces to the East or the West, but truly righteous is he who believes in Allah and the Last Day and the angels and the Book and the Prophets, and spends his money out of love for Him, on the kindred and the orphans and the needy and the wayfarer and those who ask for charity, and for ransoming the captives; and observes prayer and pays the Zakat (Charity dues); and those who fulfil their promise when they have made one, and the patient in poverty and afflictions and the steadfast in the time of war; it is these who have proved truthful and it is these who are truly God-Fearing.”
Chapter: 3 (Al-`Imran) Verse : 104
“And hold fast, all together, to the rope of Allah and be not divided; and remember the favour of Allah which He bestowed upon you when you were enemies and He united your hearts in love, so that by His grace you became as brothers; and you were on the brink of a pit of fire and He saved you from it. Thus does Allah explain to you His commandments that you may be guided.”
Chapter: 42 (Al-Shura) Verse : 24
“This it is whereof Allah gives the glad tidings to His servants who believe and do good works. Say, 'I ask of you no reward for my service to you, except such love as subsist between kindred. And whoso earns a good deed, We give him increase of good therein. Surely, Allah is Most Forgiving, Most Appreciating.”
With best of regards
Love for all, Hatred for None
Luckily for Americans, Ms. Ali is far more interesting than either CAIR or AP.
It may very well turn out that no one will pay attention to what is written about Ms. Ali and instead all interested parties will go straight to the source--the lovely, vibrant, articulate Ms. Ali.
Well, we can all hope.
"Mujahideen were given free hand in Afghanistan to establish their own government with the financial grants from US and to eliminate the remnants of Russian influenced groups like Northern Alliance...."
Excuse me, I stopped reading here, the article has some discrpancies. Doesn't the term "mujahideen" simply mean "holy warrior?" - but either side could call themselves that.
Will some one explain this to me. THe news on the general news media was that: " the U.S. military worked WITH the Northern Alliance to defeat the Taliban. "
Are they a different Northern Alliance than the ones A. Khokar talked about?
The Northern Alliance that worked with the U.S. troops - against the Home Boys i.e. Taliban, that Alliance - were even worse. Barbarians, savages,mutilating dorpses, and dragging women and girls out from their homes to rape them.
Correction: Oops. I inadverdantly sent my post on Ms. Ali to here.
Apologies.
Pythagoras.
ps--However, Islam IS the enemy!
Deliver us all from Islam, as I always say!!!!!!
Khokar the key word there is Allah. It says do good to Allah by doing good to Allah's gang. Such narrowness would have been forgiven if it wasn't for the added hostility to those who do not believe nor accept that which is Allah. Then we have to address the countless issues civilization simply cannot accept or tolerate of that which is Allah.
Frank Pastore is merely parroting the same nonsense about Islam that his friend, fellow Republican and fellow talk-show host, Hugh Hewitt, believes and spouts. In fact, I remember Hewitt asking a CAIR representative for the low-down about Islam on one of his radio shows!
The Hewitts, Pastores and other Western intellectuals do not understand that people can still be barbaric in this day and age. They also don't understand that, when it comes to Islam:
1. The number of "peaceful," "moderate" Muslims either is so small, so quiet or so intimidated as not to make an effective difference to the loud, numerous Islamists. Whether that number is a minority, a plurality or a majority is irrelevant, as the next point illustrates:
2. Certainly not all Germans were Nazis during the 1930s. In fact, the Nazis never gained enough seats in the Reichstag to hold an absolute majority before Hitler became Chancellor, nor held more than 50 percent of the popular vote (which is tantamount to the same thing in the kind of parliamentary democracy that the Weimar Republic had). But those facts are irrelevant. The Nazis had the propaganda machinery, government apparatus and police power to make their "plurality" an effective majority, regardless of what the rest of Germany might have wanted or thought (and Hitler wasn't exactly unpopular, either).
3. The issue really isn't whether the militants are a "minority" or a "majority." The issue is how Islam's legitimate religious leaders discipline -- or, in this case, fail to discipline -- the radicals. Given the lack of fatwas against al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, Zarqawi, Zarahiri, bin Laden, al-Sadr et al from those authorities (especially al-Ahzar, the most prestigious seminary in the Sunni world), it's safe to say that Islam's legitimate religious leaders are (at the very least) intimidated by the radicals, if not in outright sympathy with them (which I believe is the case).
One more point that I left out, and this is the most important:
It doesn't matter if we're not at war with Islam. For all intents and purposes, Islam is at war with us! If we fail to recognize that fact in time, then we are doomed.
dammit. I have only seen up to half way through season 5 of 24. I just read the article up to the part where you say "President Wayne Palmer", but if you have much more information that that, you should definitely put a spoiler alert on this article.