| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
This article about how young Iraqis are growing disillusioned with Islam has the expected elements of a New Duranty Times story: the affirmation that jihad violence has nothing to do with Islam ("'It was a fight to prove our existence,' said a young Shiite journalist from Sadr City. 'We were embracing our existence, not religion'" and "'As a group, they are not religious,' said Maj. Gen. Douglas Stone, the head of detainee operations for the American military. 'When we ask if they are doing it for jihad, the answer is no'") -- even as the article chronicles the disenchantment with Islam that many in Iraq are feeling. Why would the jihadists make them disenchanted with Islam if their fight has nothing to do with religion in the first place? Unexplained, of course.
Then there is the suggestion that the jihadists recruit only illiterates who can't read the Qur'an for themselves and, presumably, discover its genuine peaceful teachings: "The population they focused on, however, was poor and uneducated. About 60 percent of the American adult detainee population is illiterate, and is unable to even read the Koran that religious recruiters are preaching."
However, when the "moderate Shiite shiekh from Baghdad" laments that the jihadists quote the Qur'an when they behead someone and shout "Allahu akbar," leading Iraqi youth to "think that is Islam," this highlights the problem that is only obliquely addressed in the article: that the jihadists present themselves as the exponents of true Islam, such that those who reject the jihad end up thinking Islam itself is tainted. And we're told that "General Stone is trying to rectify the problem by offering religion classes taught by moderates," but no specifics -- as always -- are offered to explain what exactly that moderation consists of, and why such moderates have not managed to mount any large-scale counter to the Islamic basis of the global jihad.
"Violence Leaves Young Iraqis Doubting Clerics," by Sabrina Tavernise in the New York Times (thanks to all who sent this in):
BAGHDAD — After almost five years of war, many young people in Iraq, exhausted by constant firsthand exposure to the violence of religious extremism, say they have grown disillusioned with religious leaders and skeptical of the faith that they preach.In two months of interviews with 40 young people in five Iraqi cities, a pattern of disenchantment emerged, in which young Iraqis, both poor and middle class, blamed clerics for the violence and the restrictions that have narrowed their lives.
“I hate Islam and all the clerics because they limit our freedom every day and their instruction became heavy over us,” said Sara, a high school student in Basra. “Most of the girls in my high school hate that Islamic people control the authority because they don’t deserve to be rulers.”
Atheer, a 19-year-old from a poor, heavily Shiite neighborhood in southern Baghdad, said: “The religion men are liars. Young people don’t believe them. Guys my age are not interested in religion anymore.”
The shift in Iraq runs counter to trends of rising religious practice among young people across much of the Middle East, where religion has replaced nationalism as a unifying ideology.
While religious extremists are admired by a number of young people in other parts of the Arab world, Iraq offers a test case of what could happen when extremist theories are applied. Fingers caught in the act of smoking were broken. Long hair was cut and force-fed to its wearer. In that laboratory, disillusionment with Islamic leaders took hold. [...]
“In the beginning, they gave their eyes and minds to the clerics; they trusted them,” said Abu Mahmoud, a moderate Sunni cleric in Baghdad, who now works deprogramming religious extremists in American detention. “It’s painful to admit, but it’s changed. People have lost too much. They say to the clerics and the parties: You cost us this.”
“When they behead someone, they say ‘Allahu akbar,’ they read Koranic verse,” said a moderate Shiite sheik from Baghdad, using the phrase for “God is great.”
“The young people, they think that is Islam,” he said. “So Islam is a failure, not only in the students’ minds, but also in the community.”
A professor at Baghdad University’s School of Law, who identified herself only as Bushra, said of her students: “They have changed their views about religion. They started to hate religious men. They make jokes about them because they feel disgusted by them.” [...]
Religion had moved abruptly into the Shiite public space, but often in ways that made educated, religious Iraqis uncomfortable. Militias were offering Koran courses. Titles came cheaply. In Mr. Mahmoud’s neighborhood, a butcher with no knowledge of Islam became the leader of a mosque. [...]
Zane Mohammed, a gangly 19-year-old with an earnest face, watched with curiosity as the first Islamists in his Baghdad neighborhood came to barbershops, tea parlors and carpentry stores before taking over the mosques. They were neither uneducated nor poor, he said, though they focused on those who were.
Then, one morning while waiting for a bus to school, he watched a man walk up to a neighbor, a college professor whose sect Mr. Mohammed did not know, shoot the neighbor at point blank range three times, and walk back to his car as calmly “as if he was leaving a grocery store.”
“Nobody is thinking,” Mr. Mohammed said in an interview in October. “We use our minds just to know what to eat. This is something I am very sad about. We hear things and just believe them.” [...]
Some Iraqis argue that the religious-based politics was much more about identity than faith. When Shiites voted for religious parties in large numbers in an election in 2005, it was more an effort to show their numbers, than a victory of the religious over the secular.
“It was a fight to prove our existence,” said a young Shiite journalist from Sadr City. “We were embracing our existence, not religion.” [...]
“I used to love Osama bin Laden,” proclaimed a 24-year-old Iraqi college student. She was referring to how she felt before the war took hold in her native Baghdad. The Sept. 11, 2001, strike at American supremacy was satisfying, and the deaths abstract.
Now, the student recites the familiar complaints: Her college has segregated the security checks; guards told her to stop wearing a revealing skirt; she covers her head for safety.
“Now I hate Islam,” she said, sitting in her family’s unadorned living room in central Baghdad. “Al Qaeda and the Mahdi Army are spreading hatred. People are being killed for nothing.” [...]
The population they focused on, however, was poor and uneducated. About 60 percent of the American adult detainee population is illiterate, and is unable to even read the Koran that religious recruiters are preaching.
That leads to strange twists. One young detainee, a client of Abu Mahmoud, the moderate Sunni cleric, was convinced that he had to kill his parents when he was released, because they were married in an insufficiently Islamic way. General Stone is trying to rectify the problem by offering religion classes taught by moderates.
Moderates by what criteria?
There is a new favorite game in the lively household of the young Baghdad journalist. When they see a man with a turban on television, they yell and crack jokes. In one joke, people are warned not to give their cellphone numbers to a religious man.There is a new favorite game in the lively household of the young Baghdad journalist. When they see a man with a turban on television, they yell and crack jokes. In one joke, people are warned not to give their cellphone numbers to a religious man.
“If he knows the number, he’ll steal the phone’s credit,” the journalist said. “The sheiks are making a society of nonbelievers.”
Posted by Robert at March 4, 2008 12:57 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
"When they behead someone, they say ‘Allahu akbar,’ they read Koranic verse...The young people, they think this is Islam"
Well isnt it?
![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at March 4, 2008 1:23 PM
“Now I hate Islam,” she said, sitting in her family’s unadorned living room in central Baghdad. “Al Qaeda and the Mahdi Army are spreading hatred. People are being killed for nothing.”
I guess Islam was ok when infidels were killed.
Posted by: Elric66 at March 4, 2008 1:31 PM
"I guess Islam was ok when infidels were killed."
Posted by: Elric66 at March 4, 2008 1:31 PM
...was OK when "only" infidels were being killed.
Posted by: awake at March 4, 2008 1:52 PM
“Now I hate Islam,” she said, sitting in her family’s unadorned living room in central Baghdad. “Al Qaeda and the Mahdi Army are spreading hatred. People are being killed for nothing.”
And THIS is why we must NOT abandon Iraq.
They have tasted the full fruit of Islam and found it bitter and rotten! They are learning, on their own, what some here said they never would - that given the choice between Islam and freedom, NEXT TIME they will choose freedom.
We are winning this one, fellow Infidels. NOW IS NOT THE TIME TO GIVE UP!
Kill the Jihadi – educate the Muslim.
DEUS VULT!
at March 4, 2008 2:01 PM
You know, "if wishes were fishes, we would all cast nets".
When you can't kill the infidel, you have to kill someone. Hey, you aren't Islamic enough...............Bang!
And how long did it take for you to figure out that the jihad is not a good thing? Why did it take you so long to figure it out? Is there no room in Islam for independent thought? Critical thinking?
Posted by: tanstaafl at March 4, 2008 2:08 PM
"In two months of interviews with 40 young people in five Iraqi cities"
So, out of the entire (27.5 Million) population of Iraq, drawing from 5 cities... they interviewed 40 young people over 2 months.
Exactly how representative of the general population... or even of young Iraqis... is this study? How can you draw conclusions like this from such a infinitesimal sample????
Posted by: StephenDvd at March 4, 2008 2:19 PM
So the butcher becomes the leader of the mosque? Can't think of any more appropriate qualification...
But isn't it nice, how they have to learn first hand that their religion is a trap?
at March 4, 2008 2:22 PM
What about the Doctors in England and elsewhere who embraced Jihad and tried to blow up an airport? Are they illiterate too?
Posted by: scribe10 at March 4, 2008 2:34 PM
I can understand anyone with an ounce of common sense becomming disillusioned with Islam. The hate, violence, injustice and oppression so prevalent in Islamic societies should cause any decent, peace-loving person to question the root causes of it all.
However, if their disillusionment is based on the premise that the Jihadists are preaching and practicing an unIslamic version of their faith, they're more delusional than disillusioned. The question is, what would their reaction be if they discovered that the Jihadists were operating on solid theological ground, perfectly consistent with Islamic teachings?
Would they then concede that they are wrong and the Jihadists are right, or would they figure out that Islam itself is the the cause of all the dysfunctions on their world? Now that world be a truly liberating disillusionment.
I don't know what the "moderates" are teaching them, but it can't be the whole truth.
Posted by: rational
at March 4, 2008 2:35 PM
A great example of "be careful what you wish for"!
And may I add: God works in mysterious ways.
Posted by: eve_anne_gelical at March 4, 2008 2:56 PM
Guess who's at fault for this dreadful lack of piety? The Americans-who threatened and tortured the faithful into giving up on Mo. This is what we will hear in the future-you can count on it.
Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at March 4, 2008 3:16 PM
No terrorist left behind.
Posted by: jsla at March 4, 2008 3:20 PM
"When they behead someone, they say ‘Allahu akbar,’" . . .
When you hear someone shout, "Allahu Akbar!"
What should you do?
at March 4, 2008 3:25 PM
47:35.
So be not weak and ask not for peace (from the enemies of Islâm), while you are having the upper hand. Allâh is with you, and will never decrease the reward of your good deeds.
at March 4, 2008 3:32 PM
It sounds like a little progress is being made, but as mentioned above, 40 seems like a pretty small sample to be basing any judgments on.
Posted by: walterc at March 4, 2008 3:49 PM
Im certian the DC government will open Islamic schools to instruct on Islam to teach true Islam .
Posted by: GrennBeck at March 4, 2008 4:28 PM
So much effort, time, and resources are wasted attempting to put the jihad genie (djinni) back in the bottle, instead of exorcising it. For what purpose? So like last time it can lie abeyant for a hundred years and recrudesce with vengeance? So we can pretend to have a Pretend Islam?
The following must be rejected by ALL Muslims:
al nasikh wa al mansukh (2:106, 17:86 and 16:101)
- we don't want to hear any Muslims saying or doing anything that is not peaceful. Want to be called a Religion of Peace-TM? Then you better be peaceful? Peaceful verses trump, got it?
sirah rasul Allah and ahadith
- keep the uswa hosana and al-insan al-kamil to yourself. We're not impressed by how your hero is portrayed in the Qur'an, much less these tomes.
shariah and any code based on it
- no hand chopping, no hangings, no beheading, no misogyny, no compulsion in religion, ANY chosen religion, got it?
every political and imperialistic aspect of Islam
-have all the peaceful inner struggle you want. You forge an army, you got a fight. Got it?
There are a lot of things ALL Muslims better start embracing as well. Start by reading the US Bill of Rights, and don't get fixated on amendment #2, either.
Posted by: Concerned Citizen at March 4, 2008 4:36 PM
Many Iraqis aren't illiterate, they're just gullible for believing what they read. And many Americans are literate, but they're just too lazy to read what others believe.
Posted by: jewdog at March 4, 2008 6:08 PM
>>The Sept. 11, 2001, strike at American supremacy was satisfying, and the deaths abstract.
I have no sympathy for you, 24-year-old Iraqi college student.
at March 4, 2008 6:09 PM
"Start by reading the US Bill of Rights, and don't get fixated on amendment #2, either"
--Concerned Citizen
That amendment applies to Americans to keep their government from being perverted--by such things as foreign ideologies (Islam falls into that category).
Posted by: unicorns62000 at March 4, 2008 6:15 PM
"strike at American supremacy"
You little ingrate. Every single technological instrument you happily use, including the internet, comes from "American supremacy." You little hypocrite. OK, stop using light bulbs, electricity, radio, TV, CD/DVD, telephone, including cellular phones, and Internet NOW, because they were all invented by American supremacy, you little hypocrite. You little "abstract."
What have your people, Mohammedans, invented? -- NOTHING. You parasites. And you wonder why we don't "respect" you. All you have to offer is allah, the pagan moon murder god that doesn't exist.
Posted by: darcy at March 4, 2008 6:19 PM
I though “Allah Ackbar” was Arabic for “off with your head infidel”?
Posted by: BurgerBoy at March 4, 2008 6:21 PM
It might be a bit of a death trap, but maybe now some missionaries should get over there and teach these young iraqis about christianity.
Posted by: stheswede at March 4, 2008 6:37 PM
Darcy
WOW! The US invtented ALL of those things?
Something tells me they didn't, but let's not let truth spoil your perfectly valid point.
Howver it would be nice for Americans to recognise that they aren't the only creative, inventive force on planet earth though.
The point that Muslims are nothing more than leeches who demand respect from behind a gun because they are wholly incapable of earning it through creativity and contribution is nevertheless a point very well made.
Begs the question: Why are we toleraring them?
Posted by: Britannia's Lion at March 4, 2008 6:49 PM
NOW IS NOT THE TIME TO GIVE UP!
by Davegreybeard
As I read the article I began to believe Bush had the right idea all along - give them a taste of freedom and they won't want to give it up.
THEN I read the statement from that 24-year-old ingrate (good word, Darcy). The 9/11 attacks were SATISFYING? The deaths ABSTRACT?
Well I would like to treat each and every Muslim death as an abstraction. Nothing to take satisfaction from (the difference between Christians and Muslims), but nothing to lose sleep over, either.
"Guards told her to stop wearing a revealing skirt; she covers her head for safety."
This is what she got from loving Osama bin Laden. You asked for it honey, you got it.
From thinking "finally they've seen the light and we'll have a friend in the Muslim world" to "why should anyone waste one second caring about Iraqis' welfare? Bring our boys home. They've done their job. Let these ingrates show us what they're made of!" all in the same article.
Davegreybeard, keep the faith. I don't know how you do it but people like you are needed. Myself, I couldn't care less what happens to these people. All they care about is themselves. Islam is fine until it affects them. Well now it's affected them. Let THEM deal with it. America and the rest of the world needs to go deaf when any Muslim cries out for help.
Posted by: PMK at March 4, 2008 6:57 PM
PMK,
Nice to converse with you again!
My motivation is more practical than altruistic. As I have said before, any benefit that accrues to the Iraqis (in the form of their freedom) from our counter Jihad effort is merely a byproduct of what we must do to win.
Fact is, we are facing an enemy of huge numbers, spread all over the world, who have unequaled tenacity to their murderous ideology. The logistics of a strictly military solution to this problem would not only be inefficient in the extreme, they approach the impossible.
We need converts and allies from the enemy camp to win this fight. Imagine for a moment how valuable to us these young Iraqis would be if we gave them just a little help. How many battalions are they worth, how many billons of dollars? Makes me wish we could converse with some of them here.
So we may feel good about helping the Iraqis to free themselves from their death cult.
But we should not for a moment forget, that we do it only to gain allies for the primary purpose – TO KILL ISLAM.
at March 4, 2008 7:31 PM
Before WWII I'm sure many in the German and Japanese populations would have extolled the superiority of their political systems. After defeat, their respective systems were condemned and loathed. For the system, the leaders, and those carrying out its policy had failed to win. After Saddam, the acceptance of defeat was postponed by Islamists who promised they would not fail as the Iraqi military did. However, they too are failing - the Americans are not going away as was promised. These people are just grieving, for they have lost a war and their country and are only now just realizing it.
Posted by: Mick_n_NYC at March 4, 2008 7:50 PM
That amendment applies to Americans to keep their government from being perverted--by such things as foreign ideologies (Islam falls into that category).Posted by: unicorns62000
No man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.
Posted by: Thomas Jefferson
Couldn't agree more. I hope that Islam can be reformed (neutered again if necessary), but I am preparing for the contrary.
Posted by: Concerned Citizen at March 4, 2008 7:59 PM
These people are just grieving, for they have lost a war and their country and are only now just realizing it.
Mick_n_NYC,
They've waited too long. Americans will begin leaving next year. Once we leave we won't go back. They will have one thing in common with the Palestinians: they missed an opportunity.
They never lost their country. They never lost a war. No one was looking to take over that piece of real estate. No one was going to steal their oil. That they were willing to join forces with the Islamists against the evil infidel once Saddam was out of the way means they aren't worth one drop of our soldiers' blood. Bring the boys home.
You're in NYC. You like that the 9/11 deaths were abstract? Police and firemen died trying to save strangers and their deaths are abstract?
Posted by: PMK at March 4, 2008 8:03 PM
Davegreybeard,
The only question is who is using whom?
You say how valuable these young Iraqis would be to us if we just gave them a little help. What have we been doing for five years? After how many lives and limbs lost fighting for these ingrates all we hear is how annoyed they are that Islamists are telling them what to do. That woman who loved Osama needs to wear a headscarf for the rest of her life. It's what she deserves.
I really want you to be right and for Iraq to become a model for other countries but if the Iraqi people aren't going to do it then it won't happen. They're not against radical Islam. They're against radical Islamists bothering THEM. If the Islamists just concentrated on the coalition, these young people would go on about their business loving Osama and how he stands against US supremacy. If they're not willing to take a stand, we might as well leave. They're not taking a stand against killers. All they care about is not being inconvenienced.
Posted by: PMK at March 4, 2008 8:12 PM
“When they behead someone, they say ‘Allahu akbar,’ they read Koranic verse,” said a moderate Shiite sheik from Baghdad, using the phrase for “God is great.”
“The young people, they think that is Islam,” he said. “So Islam is a failure, not only in the students’ minds, but also in the community.”
And so they should think it is therefore a failure – we don’t need “moderates” keeping this cult alive by saying this is not Islam, especially when it corresponds so closely to the violent behavior Muhammad endorsed. There is no central authority in Islam and hence no one can definitively say what is Islam and what isn’t. A “moderate Muslim” one day can turn into a killer Muslim zombie the next just by talking to an extremist and reading the Koran under his influence. We’ve seen this happen enough. This is a cult worse than a great plague.
The NY Times is the blind trying to lead the blind.
at March 4, 2008 8:46 PM
“They're not against radical Islam. They're against radical Islamists bothering THEM.”
Posted by: PMK
Right you are.
But think about it friend, we feel just the same way – at least I certainly do. The Islamo Nazis can kill each other ‘till hell freezes over for all I care - if they do it in their own “crapistans” and don’t bother us. If that were the case, it would not be worth one American life to try and stop them.
But that’s not the way it is. THEIR sewer is now backing up into OUR living room.
And so, we are forced to kill the Jihadi and educate the Muslim.
at March 4, 2008 9:05 PM
The Kafir and the Two Faces of Islam
If you do not accept islam,
you are a kafir and can be treated well,
or you can be treated as a denizen of hell,
reviled, not-human, like a semi slave.
This is sunnah, the way of mohammed
and his god allah.
Islam has two faces.
One face says cut the kafir's head off,
and shout allah is the greatest.
This is sunnah, the will of allah,
the way of mohammed
that muslims must follow.
Another face says leave
the kafir alone. Or bring
him tenderly to your deen.
So be cruel or be nice,
But always the kafir
must pay the price
For his disbelief.
The young Iraqi folk
have a challenge and a test,
for death to the kafir is what allah requests.
Will they comply, will they submit?
Over and over again, in the koran and sunnah,
what allah says is best for them,
what mohammed did and permitted
in this totality of life called islam,
becomes the measure of their morality.
Are they able to love all humanity
and be their friend
or must they descend again
into a primitive tribal duality,
an unreality of master/slave consciousness
that can never change? Is this what they want?
It is their choice.
Only they can give voice to an answer,
only they can choose to be Free.
at March 4, 2008 9:08 PM
This is what it will be like when islam takes over the entire world. First the economies of the nations of the world will have to lay in ruins.. from China to the USA.. islam will not rest until theere is mass chaos in the world.. like Satan.
They will destroy our art and our monuments in its wake.. and all because we are refusing to recognize the enemy and fight.
But in the end.. after the Van Goghs [they already destroyed a living Van Gogh] and the Picassos.. the Rodins.. especially those.. the Schieles come to mind and the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.. And so much more..
They will lay all of it to waste.
Unless a charismatic person.. kind of an Obama with real substance and an uncompromising message regarding our freedoms and our responsibility to defend them in the face of this insanity called islam.. unless such a person comes along and manages to change the course of our floundering ship.. Unless we get dramatic and REAL change of the hearts and minds of the liberal islam-enablers in the Western Countries already..
Unless we listen to Men like Geert Wilders who are seemingly shouting into the empty desert while a naked emperor parades by behind him and communist court jesters stick out their tongues behind his back.. and islamist snakes slither and hiss all around him..
So long as this doesn;t take place we will have to wonder only one thing:
How much destruction will we see before our young people world wide will begin to have the reactions described above against "religious men"?
Ultimately the world will either be uninhabitable for Mankind or islam will feed upon itself after there are no more hosts to infect and consume..
There will be no more dhimmis left to produce the food and the goods that everyone requires but some - Mahometans namely - refuse to work for.
They will be eaten by their own children but we all will pay the price first for the laissez-fair attitudes of the feeble quisling enablers who live inside our very own lands.
See also under: Cindy Sheehan and most every lieberal everywhere.
We should not forget there are also those who enable islam against their own better judgment for money.
See also under: GWB, MexiCain, Clinton and too many more to mention.
So there we have it - the union of liEberals and careerist yuppies-in-power enabling the Death of Civilization to enter the West.
It's a bloody bloody shame since so many of us have the logic to see the impending doom from miles and miles away.. and somehow we are incapable of stopping it.
Posted by: Allah Schmallah at March 4, 2008 9:12 PM
Notwithstanding the weasel talk of the Duranty Times, I see hope in this.
Remember osama's strong horse / weak horse rap?
When the jihaddis get their butts kicked on a regular basis, and people start to notice that wherever a jihaddi steps there grows a pile of trouble and nothing else, they're going to start to doubt.
Does the Times want to cover up the connection to islam? Sure!
But if the believers are starting to say "Hey, waita minnit!" progress is being made.
Regarding the "we're trying to assert our existence" business, disgusting as it is, I refer you to Erik Hoffer's "The True Believer".
Movements, however charismatic, can also fail you know.
Posted by: joeblough at March 4, 2008 9:30 PM
Even reciting the Kuran while performing beheadings (which is actually a fairly NORMAL activity throughout the Muslim world... for Muslims and not anyone else I am aware of eccept possibly for a few isolated tribes in remote tropical areas) does NOT justify this barbaric, inhuman act. The Kuran calls for the act of beheading more than once (usually reserved for the "unbelievers" or, gasp!, "polytheists") in its pages-- and is likewise unable to justify the killing it calls for.
But don't bother telling this to any mosque imam--he'll have YOUR head for saying that!
at March 4, 2008 10:18 PM
"Begs the question: Why are we toleraring them?"
Posted by: Britannia's Lion
we are tolerating them--because we cannot do what we should do to them.
we are "tolerating" them because we have a leader who is more than tainted by the dwellers in the nest from which swarms Islam.
We are "tolerating" them because the majority of our population is confused (because of the above-mentioned leader), see such ghastly apparations as the Nancy Pelosis and Clinton women with head coverings "in respect for Islam," as if that ideology deserves any respect.
We are "tolerating" them. because we have not yet gotten our stuff together to start in all seriousness a movement against the jihad that is bereft of fear--fear of government, law enforcement, judges, courts, etc.
The ideology still is protected by its guise as a religion (very cleverly), and as such, it seeks the protection of our Constitution (which it is determined to destroy after having made use of it).
Therefore, laws, law enforcement, the courts are protective of the ideology and are against us (who are not okay with "tolerating" the abomination.)
The ideology has infiltrated our government to its highest levels, It has infiltrated our armed forces. All the foregoing more than "tolerate," they encourage the participation of the ideology that has jihad as one of its commandments.
Do you see what anyone is up against who does not want to "tolerate" the ideology of violence, death, and mayhem?
Posted by: unicorns62000 at March 4, 2008 10:36 PM
From Galliawatch
[-]
"The outstanding event of our time is the violence of the advance of Islam. Underestimated by most of our contemporaries, the ascendancy of Islam is analogically comparable to the beginnings of communism at the time of Lenin.
The consequences of this phenomenon are still unpredictable. At the outset of the Marxist revolution, people thought they could stem its tide through partial solutions. Neither Christianity nor organizations such as corporations or labor unions found a solution.
Likewise today the Western world is hardly prepared to confront the problem of Islam. In theory, the solution does indeed seem extremely difficult. Perhaps it would be possible in practice, if, limiting ourselves to the French aspect of this question, the solution were thought out and applied by a genuine statesman.
The current known facts of the problem lead one to believe that the various forms of Muslim dictatorship are soon to be established successively throughout the Arab world. When I say "Muslim", I'm thinking less of religious structures than of the temporal structures that flow from Mahomet's doctrine. As of now, the sultan of Morocco is out-dated and Bourguiba will only stay in power by becoming a dictator of sorts. Perhaps partial solutions would have been sufficient to stem the tide of Islam, if they had been applied in time...Now it is too late! The "wretched ones" have nothing to lose. They would rather preserve their wretchedness within the Muslim community. Their fate will probably not change. We have a vision of them that is too Western. To the benefits we claim to be able to bring them, they prefer the future of their race. Black Africa will not remain much longer untouched by this process. All that we can do is to become conscious of the gravity of the phenomenon and to try to slow down its progression."
André Malraux, June 3, 1956
Note: Bourguiba was president of Tunisia until 1987.
Notice that he points to the need for a "genuine statesman". One can only imagine what he would think of Sarkozy. He also limits the spread of Muslim dictatorships to the "Arab world." Possibly in 1956 he did not envisage the spread of Islam into Europe and America (it was almost unthinkable back then). Or possibly he did somehow foresee that the spread of violent Islam in the Arab countries would eventually spill over into France. Which is why he warns of the need to stop its progress.
[-]
Posted by: Borg at March 4, 2008 10:41 PM
From article: “The young people, they think that is Islam,” he said. “So Islam is a failure, not only in the students’ minds, but also in the community.”
Amen to that brother, now we are getting somewhere.
Posted by: duh_swami at March 4, 2008 10:48 PM
We are tolerating them for two reasons.
Oil.
We have not started using alternate energy because oil used to be cheap.
Immigrants.
The accountants tell the governments that not enough children are being born and in order to keep up the GDP of western countries they need to import people. Muslims are the only ones having children except subsaharan Africa which is so riddled with AIDS that they are not importable. (Although why hardworking, Christian, Polish aren't considered good to import I can't understand.)
Unless cars are converted to solar panel roofs with a mini-windmill fan attached to the front end to regenerate the battery while driving, or some other renewable, safe, cheap energy, the oil will still be needed since ethanol is being critized. Why don't Warren Buffet and Bill Gates put their money into developing that? Something that would help the future of the whole world? Maybe because oil profits are in the billions? A YouTube search will show average people that have made their cars run on electric. If they can do it why can't billionaires? And the electric Volt car was a viable car but it was stopped. Why? Oil money? What about hydrogen cars? They are worried about it burning in a crash. And electric batteries burning. Don't gasoline cars burn too? Oil is just going to keep getting more and more expensive. (Those Saudi princes have expensive taste and lots of kids to support that won't work.)
And unless babies are born in greater numbers, enough to keep the country actually growing, not just stable, the governments will not stop the immigration. Even if it means the natives will be wiped out eventually. People are power. Young people are more power. A country can't function without them.
at March 4, 2008 11:11 PM
Iraq used to be the most secularized country among the Arab countries in the middle east, the youngsters remember and can compare how it have became with religious nuts come to power with the war. Many Iraqi women have complained about harsh and strict dress code that been mandatory with the mullahs in power.
Guess NYT feel its best to “balance” it with stuff about that’s it not “real” Islam to not be hunted by CAIR and charged of Islamophobia.
at March 4, 2008 11:11 PM
Iraq used to be the most secularized country among the Arab countries in the middle east, the youngsters remember and can compare how it have became with religious nuts come to power with the war. Many Iraqi women have complained about harsh and strict dress code that been mandatory with the mullahs in power.
Guess NYT feel its best to “balance” it with stuff about that’s it not “real” Islam to not be hunted by CAIR and charged of Islamophobia.
at March 4, 2008 11:12 PM
Allah Schmallah said,
"Unless a charismatic person.. kind of an Obama with real substance and an uncompromising message regarding our freedoms and our responsibility to defend them in the face of this insanity called islam..."
Sorry, a "kind of an Obama" doesn't cut it for me. Fighting the jihad under the leadership of a "kind of an Obama?" No thanks. I do not mean to belittle what you said,Allah Schmallah, everything else makes sense, but let's take another look at the only Obama we got:
Goes to his father's homeland Kenya, but then dresses up in A Somali (Moslem) outfit (elder? why elder? Obama was no--is no--Elder).
His "charisma" is all in his mouth and voice. Look at what his woman said. She is not proud of their country. He refuses to honor the flag or anthem.
She still chafes from the years when her ancestors were slaves. She holds that grudge. She bypasses the Civil War--not fought "to free the slaves," I know--that resulted in the slaves being freed.
White people died in that war. White people--Americans--helped escaped slaves in the North before the war.
She is not proud of that.
Then the Civil Rights movement of the 60s: white people died so that black people could "overcome." No one expects gratitude, the people that died did not expect gratitude. They wanted to see black people enjoy the freedoms available to all.
But Michelle Obama finds nothing to be proud of--until a--sort of--black man (Barack Obama) rose to become a candidate--although she says that's not it. What then? Why is she proud of the U.S. now?
Obama himself does not share his wife's slave heritage. But he comes from a part-Moslem family in Kenya.
He belongs to an Afrocentric church, with a pastor who is not 100% with us--Americans. He is more concerned with black people and Africa.
An Obama president would have that woman on his side, whispering in his ear, in his bed.
Not a fitting leader for an anti-jihad. I know, you can't get what we really need. But Obama is not the least of three evils (if you consider all three remaining presidential candidates as one sort of evil or another--as someone here holds in his comment).
Posted by: unicorns62000 at March 4, 2008 11:19 PM
I don't know if this first one is safe, but at least ideas are being implemented to get us mostly off oil. If they could think outside the box a little bit more and combine several technologies, it could be done. There is no law that says cars have to keep their current shape and size.
Indian engineering. Lets watch what happens!
http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4217016.html
And this-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/2281011.stm
Also google the Tesla car.
And take a look at the Hydrogen Hummer car.
Posted by: Borg at March 4, 2008 11:44 PM
unicorn- Is there a good candidate for the US election? Do you want McCain? What if McCain's cancer comes back?
Posted by: Borg at March 4, 2008 11:46 PM
Not really Off-topic [from pi-news.net]
Are you a Democrat, a Republican, or a Southerner?
Here is a little test that will help you decide. The answer can be found by posing the following question:
You’re walking down a deserted street with your wife and two small children.
Suddenly, an Islamic Terrorist with a huge knife comes around the corner, locks eyes with you, screams obscenities, praises Allah, raises the knife, and charges at you. You are carrying a 40 caliber Glock, and you are an expert shot. You have mere seconds before he reaches you and your family. What do you do?
__________________________________________________
THINK CAREFULLY AND THEN SCROLL DOWN
Democrat’s Answer:
Well, that’s not enough information to answer the question!
Does the man look poor or oppressed?
Have I ever done anything to him that would inspire him to attack?
Could we run away?
What does my wife think?
What about the kids?
Could I possibly swing the gun like a club and knock the knife out of his hand?
What does the law say about this situation?
Does the Glock have an appropriate safety built into it?
Why am I carrying a loaded gun anyway, and what kind of message does this send to society and to my children?
Is it possible he’d be happy with just killing me?
Does he definitely want to kill me, or would he be content just to wound me?
If I were to grab his knees and hold on, could my family get away while he was stabbing me?
Should I call 9-1-1?
Why is this street so deserted?
We need to raise taxes, have a paint and weed day, and make this a happier, healthier street that would discourage such behavior.
This is all so confusing! I need to debate this with some friends for few days and try to come to a consensus.
________________
End of story, end of Democrat
________________
Republican’s Answer:
BANG!
__________________________
End of story, end of Terrorist
__________________________
Southerner’s Answer:
BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG!
BANG! Click….. (Sounds of reloading)
BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG!
BANG! Click
Daughter: ‘Nice grouping, Daddy! Were those the Winchester Silver Tips or Hollow Points?’
Son: ‘Can I shoot the next one!?’
Wife: ‘You’re not takin’ that to the Taxidermist!’
__________________________
To be continued…
_______________
at March 5, 2008 2:03 AM
@unicorns62000
Excellent "tolerating" well written and refreshing. Keep it up.
@Borg
Likewise, thank you for pasting that speech by André Malraux. I thought I was reading something written yesterday.
-----------------------
I know we have strayed from the thread but if you think about it, these selfish Iraq brats are in some way not much different than the American public. They don't want to be bothered and they have not been told the truth. Not being bothered is stronger right know that accepting the truth. Right after 9/11 they would have listened if they were told the truth. All most 7 years later and being constantly worn down by the MSM. They, like lemmings are responding to Obama. None of the candidates have gotten within 1/10 of what is regularly post on this blog. Why, because the public 'does not what to be bothered'. I almost cry as I type.
I will tell you how I know this. When the subject is brought up what happens? You are attacked from any number of directs. These are almost laughable and completely out of left field relative to the subject. We are all very familiar with them. Christians, racist, hate Muslims, our fault, war is not the answer and on and on and on. Except for the gorilla in the room Islam.
Something (bad) I am afraid will need to happen again before the public will be in a position to hear the truth.
We need another orator, like the ones we have had in the past. Even like Obama is now. He/she will first need to tell the people that they have been selfish and not willing to fast the truth. Next he/she needs to talk, remind, reason, joke, cajole and point at the gorilla in the room.
Finally I remember something Ronald Reagan said once. He was speaking and there was a fight for control. They tried to cut off his microphone. He grabbed the mike and in no uncertain terms said, "I am paying for this mike...". The point is that the mike need to be control and not by the MSM.
Posted by: Im.mad.as.HELL! at March 5, 2008 2:08 AM
I should add that no matter if I were an excellent shot or not.. I'm confident that I'd hit the sonuffa bitch enough times to stop 'im dead in 'is tracks.
And I know I'd be emptying a few extra rounds in 'im - just to make sure the sucka don't move.
Unicorns.. I'm sure you're a good guy.. but you really didn't get the gist of my Obama statement earlier. Please read more carefully before you criticize.
at March 5, 2008 2:09 AM
To fight Islam need not involve much armed confrontation.
Look at Geert Wilders and his film.
It needs courage, fortitude for the whole non Muslim world to broadcast a steady 24/7 propaganda laying Islam bare to the whole world.
The MSM, the advertising agencies, the artist, the writers need a concerted effort to do what can be done, what must be done.
The explanations of the canonical texts. The history of jihad. The ultimate goal of the ideology.
The refusal of any an all Muslim demands on infidel lands.
The surveillance of Mosques. The banning of Muslim faith schools, madrassas on infidel land.
Banning Muslims from taking public office. Excluding them from the military, governments, institutions.
The end for the show of respect for Islam as a religion.
Say out loud, scream from every window. "I am mad as hell, and I am not taking it anymore" ( a nod to Peter Finch in Network).
But it needs courage. Do we have it? No. Not yet.
Posted by: pr126 at March 5, 2008 2:14 AM
Allah Schmallah - those were great!!! LOL!! Glad I tuned in to this thread before turning in for the night. This one is easy: end of terrorist.
at March 5, 2008 2:27 AM
Would not be suprising if the young Iraqis end up rejecting Islam itself.
Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at March 5, 2008 5:55 AM
bigcatgirl - That's what they said when the Iranian revolution happened in 1979. That the young would reject it after a short while because it restricts the freedom they were used to having.
If it isn't rejected quickly, they adjust and then within a few years it seems normal and then the next generation defends it because they no nothing else.
Posted by: Borg at March 5, 2008 8:36 AM
Darcy
WOW! The US invtented ALL of those things?
Something tells me they didn't, but let's not let truth spoil your perfectly valid point.
Howver it would be nice for Americans to recognise that they aren't the only creative, inventive force on planet earth though.
The point that Muslims are nothing more than leeches who demand respect from behind a gun because they are wholly incapable of earning it through creativity and contribution is nevertheless a point very well made.
Begs the question: Why are we toleraring them?
Posted by: Britannia's Lion at March 4, 2008 6:49 PM
Hi Lion. Not just America, but the West. Which I should have specified yesterday.
Thanks for saying "a point very well made." Yes, it is, isn't it? A people who demand "respect" when all they are historically are parasites living off of various Western hosts and historically mass-murdering other people not Islamic, as their Murder Book instructs them.
Why are we tolerating? I guess the West has entered a period of demented stupidity, but the tide always turns. The West will prevail in the end.
Posted by: darcy at March 5, 2008 8:45 AM
"When they behead someone, they say ‘Allahu akbar,’ they read Koranic verse...The young people, they think this is Islam"
Well isnt it?
Posted by: Elric66 at March 4, 2008 1:23 PM
Yes, of course it is. Why do they continue telling these lies about Islam? And so easily checked out as lies simply by consulting the Koran. They really think we're stupid, don't they?
at March 5, 2008 8:55 AM
And here's a few more good ideas. We need to start seriously thinking about this change over to new technology.
New ideas are being worked on and some are ready to go.
From France
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmqpGZv0YT4
From India
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7Orqt85_ww&NR=1
at March 5, 2008 9:03 AM
I spent 3 years in Libya while King Idris was the ruler and he gave the women the choice of what they wearing (his wives and daughters all choose to wear western style clothing). There was a beautiful catholic church right downtown Tripoli (there was a large number of catholics in the area) which was never bothered, that I know of during the time I was there. He was pro British and American and made sure that all of his subjects were aware of it.
I left just a few months before Gadhafi took control of the country while King Idris was out of country. It didn't take long for Libya to return to their Muslin ways. I don't know for a fact that the church is still there, but I'll bet just about anything that it's not or it's all boarded up. No matter how long we stay in the raghead region, when we pull out they will return to their old ways and we won't have gained anything. This government needs to understand that we are not going to change them. We are pouring money into the region when it could be spendt here on our people instead of people who hate us.
Posted by: retiredAFNCO
at March 5, 2008 10:15 AM
retiredAFNCO-- Agreed.
Posted by: Borg at March 5, 2008 10:20 AM
And a water powered car. Uses electric and water. No gasoline.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZOsOB3z3IE
Posted by: Borg at March 5, 2008 11:03 AM
“I used to love Osama bin Laden,” proclaimed a 24-year-old Iraqi college student. She was referring to how she felt before the war took hold in her native Baghdad. The Sept. 11, 2001, strike at American supremacy was satisfying, and the deaths abstract.
Now, the student recites the familiar complaints: Her college has segregated the security checks; guards told her to stop wearing a revealing skirt; she covers her head for safety.
“Now I hate Islam,” she said, sitting in her family’s unadorned living room in central Baghdad. “Al Qaeda and the Mahdi Army are spreading hatred. People are being killed for nothing.” [...]
Islam, as written in the holy texts and as traditionally interpreted, is far too rigid to allow for intellectual adjustments of its aggressively violent aspects. Its reformation will thus most likely be long and bloody and violent and when it is over it will leave millions upon millions of jaded apostates in its path.
Our best bet is to contain it as much as possible, and if we find any genuine Attaturk-like secular reformers (not idiot game players like Saddam), support them without concerns for the sham voting that would only bring Islamists to power (thanks to intimidation of apostates), dragging the whole thing out longer and bloodier. Support for such reformers would involve letting them treat theocratic political opponents as guilty of treason, with all that that entails. That's the way to reduce the bloodiness of the coming reformation. Prevent Islamist violence from spreading from the current Dar-al-Islam on the one hand, help support the kind of government necessary to make the reformation go relatively smoothly within Dar-al-Islam on the other.
Orthodox Islam is not compatible with the modern world. Something has to give. For the sake of what is good and just, what gives must not be the modern world.
at March 5, 2008 11:41 AM
Another potential replacement for oil.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tf4gOS8aoFk&feature=related
at March 5, 2008 12:08 PM
Borg
That is amazing and that is what it takes to end the petroleum madness...with it goes the power of islam. Thank you.
Posted by: pismopal at March 5, 2008 9:35 PM
pismopal- Yes, that MUST happen. Glad you watched.
Then western countries need to stop giving away the tax money to foreign countries so that families can afford more kids. Otherwise the immigration will not stop. A country needs young people. Kids.
Posted by: Borg at March 5, 2008 10:54 PM
allah schmallah,
Best laugh of the night. May the south rise again and save us all.
Posted by: Infidel Brotherhood at March 6, 2008 1:00 AM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)