A U.S. soldier, writing under the name "Thomas Paine" at Human Events this morning, takes apart the Pat Buchanan column to which I responded here.
If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle. - Sun Tzu, The Art of WarIn his recent article, Pat Buchanan purports to define why al Qaeda is at war with us. Instead, he recites enemy propaganda serving only to reinforce their talking points while continuing to convolute the real motivation behind their actions.
Over eight years since 9/11, it is amazing that a prominent conservative would not understand the fundamental motivation and doctrine driving those who have and continue to attack us. This is not rocket science.
Raymond Ibraham's analysis in his invaluable book, the Al Qaeda Reader, best summarizes it. On page xii he explains that radical Islam's war with America and the west is not finite and limited to political grievances real or imagined but is existential, transcending time and space and deeply rooted in [the Islamic] faith.
Pat mentions only half of al Qaeda's binary worldview in his article, the dar al-Islam (the land of Islam). By failing to even mention the dar al-Harb (the land of warfare), he fails to acknowledge that Islam, by doctrine (Koran 9:29), views the entire non-Muslim world as a land that must be subdued under Islamic rule (read sharia law). This is explained in the primary text of Islamic Law, Reliance of the Traveler by Ahmad ibn Naquib al-Misri (page 605).
What Buchanan also fails to mention, is taqiyya - the Islamic doctrine of deception, the understanding of which is fundamental to understanding the threat. Muhammad himself said war is deceit. (See "Summarized Sahih Al-Bukhari" by Muhammad Muhsin Khan, p. 614) Here again, Mr. Ibraham has done yeoman's work analyzing and explaining the doctrine of taqiyya and its impact on jihadist terrorism in his article, "How Taqiyya Alters Islam's Rules of War."
As we learn from Reliance of the Traveler, by Islamic law there are things Muslims are required to know and there are other things we, as non-Muslims, are allowed to know. In fact, Islamic law requires lying at times (it is obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory.) (See pages 8-14, 732 and 745).
As a result of their binary world view, al Qaeda has two main audiences: the Muslim world (the ummah) and the non-Muslim world, consisting of the United States and the rest of the Western world. As such, it uses markedly different approaches to address each group.
When speaking to America and the Western world, al Qaeda turns statements made by what Lenin called the "useful idiots" into popular propaganda. They frequently cite Michael Moore, William Blum and other liberal commentators.
In contrast, when speaking to their constituents -- the Muslim World -- bin Laden and Zawahiri instead use formal Islamic theology and sharia law as levers to enforce Muslim compliance. Those who don't comply are labeled apostates, who, by sharia, must be killed and will inhabit hell. (See "Reliance of the Traveler," pp. 595-98 and 848).
Written for Muslim audiences, they [al Qaeda's Islamic theological treatises] are rarely translated into English or disseminated to a non-Muslim public. This is unfortunate since they reveal much more about al Qaeda's ideology than the more famous political [propaganda] speeches. In these theological tracts, al Qaeda gives Muslims reasons why they should hate and fight the West that differ from those they give in their political speeches. ("Al Queda Reader," p. 2)
There's a difference between reciting the enemy and knowing the enemy. Buchanan confuses the two concepts. Which is why his cry for appeasement is misguided. He implies that if we packed up and came home (from Iraq, Afghanistan and all other Muslim countries), and adopted an isolationist foreign policy, then they would stop attacking us. Wrong.
Not only would this hand them a strategic victory, but they'd simply find another reason to continue to attack us. Islam cannot be appeased. (Koran 9:29)....
Fort Hood is only one of the 1000 bleeding cuts the global Islamic Jihadists have inflicted on the United States, whether the dhimmipoliticians and our Islam-apologist leaders want to admit it publicly or not.
They betray the very democratic principals our founding fathers asked of them to obey, freedom, truth, fair and equal justice for all, the rule of law, protection of civilians and their constitutional rights among others.
It is indeed a sad day.
"statements made by what Lenin called the "useful idiots"
I didn't know that phrase came from Lenin.
About whom is he speaking in early 20th-century Russia?
Here's a coincidence - Lenin died 21 January (1924).
Great succinct article. More ammo for the "dialogue" with those who would submit to shari'a without a fight.
Oh, and btw, I also took the time to write a respectful and civil piece of discourse to Buchanan after reading that "Human Events" column he wrote which is completely wrong.
His theory: That if we leave from "over there" they won't wage war against us anymore. Yeah right. To believe that is to know nothing about the texts and tenets of Islam.
Anyway so I wrote the piece explaining the Jihad doctrine and providing many relevant verses from the Koran and quotes from the Hadiths. Example:
Allah's Apostle was asked, "What is the best deed?" He replied, "To believe in Allah and His Apostle (Muhammad). The questioner then asked, "What is the next (in goodness)? He replied, "To participate in Jihad (religious fighting) in Allah's Cause." (Bukhari 1.2.25)
And of course:
"Fight then against them till strife be at an end, and the religion be all of it Allah's." - Qur'an 8:40
And of course 9:5 and 9:111.
Look, anyone who couldn't get it after my reasoned explanation, supported by various verses and quotes from Islamic texts is someone who simply refuses to recognize the enemy and his motivation. As RS said, "this is not rocket science."
I e-mailed it to comments at the McLaughlin Group, on which he frequently appears. So far I haven't received a reply and don't expect one. But, I tried.
Pat is another kufr coward who refuses to cross the PC 'no mans land' barrier, and look directly into the heart of Islam...And if they have done so, are too fearful to say so...
The US military's report on The Ft Hood jihad operation, is another example...You only go so far...you may even bump the line, but you dare not cross it...Fortunately, not all kufr are cowards...The U.S. soldier, writing under the name 'Thomas Paine', is obviously not a coward...'Will the real coward please stand up'...Expect Thomas to remain seated while Pat rises to the occasion...You can change that image Pat...You can recover your lost credibility...It's up to you...Get educated on the subject, get real, and your on your way...
Whatever debatable points there may be in Pat Buchanan's views of the political and religious situation in the Middle East and Central Asia, it appears that 'Thomas Paine' is the one who is rather out of his depth with regard to this subject matter. Buchanan is positively scholarly, by comparison.
One wonders which Islamic figures Tommy has had extensive dicussion with regarding the process of jihad warfare and which texts he has and has not been reading. And why? I can only assume that if he has true, sincere, interest in the subject, he would be finding that what appears to be the solid maintream of contemporary Islamic orthodoxy categorically rejects the idea that non-Muslims are to be subject to the process of jihad warfare solely because they are non-Muslims. And that such understandings frame their interpretive context as to how surahs such as Al Anfaal and Al Tawbah are to be understood, as well as, I would presume, material like Umdat al Salik.
Although, I suppose, one can give 'Tom' credit for his deft little slick rhetorical tricks and sleights of hand like conflating and collapsing "radical Islam's war" into ideas like "Islam cannot be appeased". If bait-and-switch is an Army MOS, Tom should be instantly made a 4-star general.
Tom doesn't tell us why Al Qaeda went to the trouble of specifically declaring war against the United States and not, say, against Zimbabwe, Costa Rica, and Japan, all of which fall into his 'Dar al Harb' delineation.
And then there's the requisite taqiyya reference. That would be like my concluding that since Dennis Prager has talked about the moral imperative and importance of lying [which I don't agree with him on] that I should therefore conclude that every time a Jew opens their month, they're lying through their teeth.
Let's hope Tom has been confined to mess duty and is being kept away from dangerous weaponry that requires any use of cognitive functionality and linear reasoning.
Go Pat! Go Taki!
"...it appears that 'Thomas Paine' is the one who is rather out of his depth with regard to this subject matter. Buchanan is positively scholarly, by comparison."
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHA! Yeah, right!
"One wonders which Islamic figures Tommy has had extensive dicussion with regarding the process of jihad warfare"
Not necessary due to the "War is deceit" Mohammedan maxim, and to al-taqiyya. In fact, "discussion" with "Islamic figures" not recommended, due to the already-mentioned, and due to "Islamic figures" backward anti-intellectualism. The West, with it's scientific, literary, artistic and philosophical heritage and hegemony, is well-qualified to understand simplistic Islam sans the "help" of any Muslims, Thank You.
"And then there's the requisite taqiyya reference."
Oh yes. Necessary to know that Islam sanctions deliberate lying to the "Infidel" about Islam. Due to "War is deceit" and "al-taqiyya," I wouldn't believe anything a Muslim had to say, anyway. Actually, I remember when I first learned about the existence of "al-taqiyya" - SO MUCH WAS EXPLAINED! SO MUCH FELL INTO PLACE! I realized the Mohammedans were lying! "al-taqiyya" - vitally important to understanding Muslims and Islam.
Finally, fairuzfan, judging from your violent and hate-filled mass-murder-commanding belief system, I suggest that's it's YOU who should not be allowed around dangerous weaponry.
My violent and hate-filled mass-murder-commanding belief system, Darcy? And why, exactly, do you view Catholic Christianity in such a light? Can you even begin to back up that claim? And if you're going to be a thoughtless drone, why choose to follow Mr. Spencer, who is also a member of that same hate-filled mass-murdering religion as I am?
If you are representative of the level of thought, knowledge, and intellectual discourse that Jihad Watch produces and/or attracts, one would hope that Jihad Watch leadership would be at least a bit concerned.
No matter what nasties you say about Tom, I would rather believe him than to believe you...You have little or no credibility with statements like this...'Let's hope Tom has been confined to mess duty and is being kept away from dangerous weaponry'...Yes, you would hope so wouldn't you...
If I'm ever in trouble, I will call Tom, not Fairfuzan...I have known three Toms in my life...Two could be trusted, and one was a good looking woman...I would rather be in the trenches with her... or even them, but never with someone
who demonizes my friend Tom...
America was chosen because if we are subdued, there is no other threat worthy of them to worry about. Just how many of our "Friends" in Afcrapistan are even willing to shoot their Guns?
How can you expect to be taken seriously when the Obvious alludes you???
"My violent and hate-filled mass-murder-commanding belief system, Darcy?"
Oh yeah. EVERYONE knows that, you Mass-Murderers. Islamic Barbarians.
No, Jihad Watch should be "concerned" that you are even allowed to comment here, as you're a thoughtless drone, an imbecile, and a creep. A Know-Nothing Islamic Barbarian. You have NO intellectual discourse, or thought, or knowledge. You're just a brainwashed slave to your Psycho Warlord, Mo.
I pity you, brainwashed Slave to a non-existent moon god.
"Tom doesn't tell us why Al Qaeda went to the trouble of specifically declaring war against the United States and not, say, against Zimbabwe, Costa Rica, and Japan" - Mohammedan fairuzfan
lol, why bother? Zimbabwe and Costa Rica?! You must be kidding!
It's AMERICA the Barbaric Mohammedans are after, and Western Europe. We're SO on to you, you moon-god worshippers.
Oh, and fairuzfan - stay away from that "dangerous weaponry," k? As the whole world knows your kind is inclined to KILL.
"And why, exactly, do you view Catholic Christianity in such a light? Can you even begin to back up that claim? And if you're going to be a thoughtless drone, why choose to follow Mr. Spencer, who is also a member of that same hate-filled mass-murdering religion as I am?"
fairuzfan has unwittingly refered to himself as a "thoughtless drone" ..hilarious!
f's an amateur taqiyya artist that does not possess the stones to admit that he's a muslim. He's only here to mock and belittle Robert, other posters; and he attempts to convince us that he's an EVIL "Catholic/Christian" ...yeah, he's evil, alright! ...of the mohammedan persuasion.
allah must be very disappointed in f's efforts to trick and deceive, tsk tsk ....
darcy, check out the reference at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot
Also, fairuzfan's debating style is to engage in intellectual bullying and browbeating. He's got a good command of the English language, but abuses it to score cheap points. You can see him in action at his glorious best at http://www.jihadwatch.org/2009/12/malaysian-high-court-overturns-govt-ban-on-catholic-papers-use-of-allah.html
"In political jargon, the term useful idiot was used to describe Soviet sympathizers in western countries and the attitude of the Soviet government towards them. The implication was that though the person in question naïvely thought themselves an ally of the Soviets or other Communists, they were actually held in contempt by them, and being cynically used."
Thanks, now I know the etiology of "useful idiot."
Yeah, champ - firuzafan, or whatever his name is, is so Mohammedan it's not funny. He thinks he can fool us! That's hilarious.