| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Anti-dhimmitude from D. C. Watson:
Once again, words have been spoken, or in this case quoted, sending the perpetually unhinged Muslim world on the warpath. The response to Pope Benedict's recent speech in Germany, in which he quoted a 14th century Byzantine emperor's negative opinion of Islam's founder Muhammad, was again self-defeating and destructive, and has come with the standard practice of Islamic leaders demanding an apology. An apology for what?The quote: "Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached."
As the world has witnessed Muslims go wild over rumors of a Qur'an being dropped into a toilet, and over cartoons of their "prophet" Muhammad that were created and published in a Danish newspaper, it was all but a sure bet that that the Islamic world would come unglued over the Pope's recent address, as Islamists have hit the streets in protest against the truth.
While we watch, Muslims continue to plot violent attacks around the world, and to carry out these attacks, and make threats to do it over and over again. And meanwhile, the Islamic world arrogantly demands an apology from anyone who refers to Islam as violent.The Islamic world does not deserve any apology. Islam has proven to be violent, and it has proven to be militant. No matter what the nagging Wahhabi hand puppets at the Council on American Islamic Relations or the Muslim Public Affairs Council have to say when the Western media invites them onto various talk shows to spread their propaganda, Muslims worldwide, not all but far too many, are doing exactly what the Qur'an tells them to do. A few examples of what fuels this Islamic "passion" can be found here.
The time to stop apologizing to the Islamic world is long overdue. There are plenty of Muslims who want to live in peace and want no strife with us. For the millions of them who have made it clear that they want conflict, why should their feelings matter to any of us? Negotiations with them are an exercise in futility. In their minds, they have been commanded by a higher being to kill and enslave non-Muslims, and convert or subjugate the world. No mere mortal will change their minds. They only understand domination, or being dominated. There is no middle ground with them.
For that reason alone, they've been taken off my Christmas card list. If it's war they want, then it should be war they get.
These predictable Mohammedans have made it clear that whenever anyone associates Islam with violence, they will respond with death threats, vandalism, arson, and of course, senseless murder. As many in the Islamic world are illiterate, the blame for these outbursts does not fall on the shoulders of the Pope, or on the shoulders of cartoonists, but squarely on the shoulders of Islamic Imams and governments, who spoon-feed information to their citizens and mosque attendees instead of allowing them to think for themselves.
Where are the apologies from the Islamic world for the tens of thousands of violent attacks against innocent people around the world?
Where are the apologies from Muslim “leaders” for the rapes of Western women, in Western nations, by Muslim gangs?
Where are the apologies for Muslims living in Western nations who continue to waste taxpayer dollars by filing frivolous lawsuits against American citizens who speak the truth about them and their beliefs?
Where are the apologies from the Islamic world for the multitudes of their co-religionists who migrate to the West and then refuse to respect the laws of their host nations by lying about their ties to Islamic terrorism, and who have been convicted of plotting terrorist attacks or providing support to Islamic terrorist networks?
Where are the apologies from the Islamic world for the mosques and Islamic schools that sit on Western soil and preach hate for Westerners and Western culture, while concurrently preaching allegiance only to the Qur'an?
And where are the apologies from the Islamic world for the billions upon billions of tax dollars being spent on additional security because of the actions of their co-religionists?
There have been no apologies because the “leaders” in the Islamic world are of the mindset that all lands belong to “Allah,” and that it is their mission to make sure that all lands eventually fall under the laws of the Qur'an.
Playing paddycake with these supremacists only emboldens them. The Muslims seen rioting in the streets want war with us. All anyone needs to do is listen to what they say. They are fascists, and there is no room for them in our societies. Tolerance of their way of thinking is a deadly proposition for all of us. The United States didn't become the nation it is by backing down from ideologies that are jingoistic and oppressive in origin, and there's no reason to start backing down now simply because the ideology at hand is tagged with a religious label.
Until the “leaders” in the Islamic world come to the conclusion that it is time for Islam to go through reformation, they deserve no respect, and are due no apology. War has been declared on freedom, and on peace. The Islamists have called us out, and our response should be one of overwhelming force, not mealy-mouthed cowardice and coddling. If we, as a people, become willing to keep our thoughts and opinions to ourselves for fear of the Muslim world going berserk, then we, as a people, have already allowed them to rule over us.
Therefore, say what you think, and mean what you say. If the Islamic world tilts because of it, then so be it. If they refuse to look within their own ranks, then the respect they long for will continue to elude them. The fight has commenced.
Posted by Robert at September 19, 2006 12:48 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
I think we should have a competition to guess what will send the Islamic world into a rabid frenzy next.
Let's be honest, you would have got long odds about an ice cream lid that looked like "Allah" or a few Danish cartoons.
Posted by: Celsius![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at September 19, 2006 1:31 PM
Right on D.C. Watson, keep the truth coming at us with no sugar coating.
Posted by: Truth at September 19, 2006 2:13 PM
WE should just uphold our Beliefs and Muslims can simply shape up or ship out.
We should stop importing their oil and stop China from doing so by putting tariffs on their exports. It is time to stop being a doormat for every crazed loon on the plant - we are not Psychotherapists - and I personally am fed up of watching the Morlocks burning and looting, shouting and screaming, maiming and killing because noone intelligent can agree with their crackpot slogans
As they say Enough is Enough - simply conform to civilised standards or be treated as barbarians
at September 19, 2006 2:27 PM
Angry Muslim is redundant.
Posted by: MP at September 19, 2006 2:43 PM
Totaling Up; It Was an Unjust War
by David DeCosse
The war in Iraq, on balance, was unjust. The speed of Saddam's fall does not negate this fact. Nor does the welcome moral reality of a dictator's defeat. And nor does the Bush Administration's wish to consider the overthrow of Saddam one step in a domestic and world campaign for "moral clarity."
In fact, an accurate moral assessment of the war reveals the limits of such ideological, hyped thinking.
There is seldom absolute moral clarity in war. But for centuries, just war theory has been used to assess the morality of war. In Western culture, the theory originated with great thinkers like Cicero, Augustine, and Thomas Aquinas. In essence, the theory provides a coherent set of ethical principles with which to assess war. These principles provide a middle, prudent way: They lift war out of the moral chaos into which it can easily sink; they also restrain war from the false glory it readily seeks.
In the aftermath of the fighting with Iraq, two just war principles in particular - "just cause" and "proportionality" - reveal the injustice of the war.
Leading up to the war, President Bush offered a series of causes to go to war. Among them: Saddam was evil; United Nations resolutions must be enforced; the Iraqi people should be liberated. But the cause most often cited by the president was self-defense.
Invoking the specter of 9-11, the president argued that the nexus of a tyrant like Saddam, vast stores of weapons of mass destruction, and the presence in Iraq of Al Qaeda operatives or sympathizers was a mortal threat to the United States that justified war.
For the president, it was not necessary that there were manifest signs of that threat. After 9-11, such signs could no longer be expected. What was necessary was to act preventively now or risk an all-but-certainly catastrophic future.
While self-defense is the classic instance of a just cause, the highly speculative nature of the president's self-defense argument was a moral problem from the start. Many critics rightfully said that the president's unspecified and distantly future nature of the threat from Saddam failed a crucial ethical test: The certainty of war's death and destruction could not be justified in the face of such distant uncertainty.
In the aftermath of the fighting, this judgment not only holds sway but also appears prescient. The failure thus far to find weapons of mass destruction casts doubt on whatever threat it was that Saddam had posed. Accordingly, the already doubtful self-defense argument used by the president risks, in moral terms, being that much more undermined. Also, a crucial moral question can now be raised about the democratic consent of the American people to go to war on the basis of such possibly erroneous information.
Without the weapons of mass destruction, it has not been surprising to hear the administration now speak of the war in terms of liberty, liberation, and democracy. The president's speech aboard the Abraham Lincoln was almost entirely in that key.
The administration clearly deserves moral praise for the pursuit and, where accomplished, achievement of these aims. But the just war principle of proportionality requires that these moral outcomes never be detached from their close and obvious consequences. The principle asks whether the harms caused by this war are proportionate to the good achieved by it.
In the case of Iraq, the principle points to the following moral problems: the post-war chaos in Iraq; the glacial pace of positive changes, if any, to the situation in Israel and the West Bank; ongoing terrorism like the recent attacks in Riyadh and Morocco; needlessly deteriorating relationships with allies like France, with countries throughout the world, and with the United Nations; and, not least of all, the disturbing and increasingly martial character of the American people.
Posted by: bezgin at September 19, 2006 3:01 PM
The muslims are the ones who owe apologies, too many reasons to mention, to all the religions, all the peace loving humans in the world, who jump over backwards to help them out in their various never ending disasters, while their leaders keep the masses, uneducated and opressed. Makes it easier to gather them to howl.
The imams( spiritual leaders, hahaha) have no shame in begging from the civilised countries, lying about causes to get aid, work the crowds into a frenzy to attack, to kill. Do they ever look at themselves, hear their own words of pure hatred? Do they understand the meaning of the word "religion?"
Posted by: freetoBEfree at September 19, 2006 3:08 PM
David DeCosse: "... glacial pace of positive changes..."
Spoken like someone who watches too much TV. Iraq is a skirmish in a global war that is going to go on for centuries, and the seige of Israel will never cease as long as Islamic ideology persists in the surrounding territories. Iraq has nothing directly to do with that situation.
David DeCosse, again: "...the disturbing and increasingly martial character of the American people.."
The American people are belatedly waking up to a global Islamic assault on freedom, and David DeCosse thinks this is unfortunate.
David DeCosse presumes to lecture us all about morality. I would suggest to David DeCosse that he would better apply his energies to figuring out why Islam is totally excused from criticism based on "just war theory" and "the principle of proportionality." Bludgeoning the President using 20-20 hindsight about one skirmish in the Islamic war against civilization might be partisan fun, but it is intellectually dishonest.
at September 19, 2006 4:24 PM
Hey!
Slightly off-topic(not really but...)
I saw in the article´s link to a June 21 piece that the Quran has some 160 verses(belligerent ones I assume was meant)
When speaking of Islam, trying to point out various things about this issue we all encounter these comparisons along the lines of
"One can find terrible things in the Bible as well, which can be twisted into meaning yada yada yada.."
Quantity of belligerent verses might not mean that much in itself, it only struck me as a possible eye-opener. Especially if there is a huge difference between Quran and fx the Bible, both old & new testaments.
Or compared with Hitler´s "Mein Kampf" if the comparison is possible to make...
Anyone who knows such numbers?
Zev
at September 19, 2006 4:29 PM
Zev,
There really are no "presciptive" commands to violence in the Holy Bible, and that is the primary difference. The violence of the Bible is clearly "desciptive": Certain time (thousands of years ago), certain particular location (Israel), certain reason, etc. The violence is intense, but also localized and final. The only arguable prescriptions toward violence come with punishments within the Hebrew community. The "prescriptive" commands of Jesus Christ are the antithesis of commands to violence. The God, Yahweh, of the Holy Bible is clear in saying "Vengence is mine". Justice will eventually be fulfilled, and "no evildoer will be left unpunished". However, believers are not to seek revenge. In fact, they are to pray for those who persecute them. The reason we can do this is the promise of a just God who will even the scales on judgement day. Additionally, in the Christian Faith the belief is that we have all earned Hell by our sins. It is only through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ (and faith in that sacrifice and Jesus as God) that sins are cleared. Therefore, there is no sense of being "superior" to non-Christians. We are all sinners.
Islam, on the other hand, commands "prescriptive" violence in at least 109 verses of the Koran (at my count). Surah 9:5 puts it best: "slay the unbelievers wherever you find them". Far more from Mohammed's Hadiths. The commands are universal and not tied to any time, place or location. Muslims are to fight and kill "infidels" until the world is subjegated to "Allah" or Sharia Law. Additionally, the Koran is pretty clear in saying that Muslims commanded to seek revenge FOR GOD! One Surah is quite direct in this: "slice them above the necks, it is not you who slew them but Allah."
What's crazy is the Theology that holds an all-powerful God would need one puny man to murder another puny man to get His revenge. It just makes no logical sense: Why would a God who created all men in His own image desire for some of those men (all of who have committed sin) to murder others in His name? The God who created the universe is too weak to get His revenge without men? We all know that murder, hatred and violence destroy the human soul, and yet Muslims believe the Loving Creator wants this evil done in His name?
Basically, Mohammed made up a religion that appeals to the worst in man: Hatred, Jealousy, revenge, lust, etc. etc. It appeals to the natural man and therefore entices many truly weak and insecure men into it's ranks. Of course, as Mohammed was the ultimate pedophile, weak/insecure man, etc. this makes sense.
Posted by: hello123 at September 19, 2006 4:56 PM
Thanks h123!
I already suspected something along those lines, that a comparison in pure numbers of verses would limp.
at September 19, 2006 5:07 PM
“perpetually unhinged”
Well said.
Riots, suicide bombings, senseless murders all done by the same wackjobs. Every day a new instance of our “Religion of Peace’s” TM, savage truculence.
Posted by: SickofitALL at September 19, 2006 5:44 PM
Islam owes us an apology, mates.
at September 19, 2006 10:57 PM
you do a dis-service to children when you compare this behavior to children: muslim behavior in the face of criticism isn't childish: it's IRRATIONAL ... and normal chilren are rational . . .
Posted by: me||ow at September 19, 2006 08:13 PM
Muslims behave like the rabid lunatics they are, inspired by a demonic, genocidal pedophile. Malevolent children are rare, but malevolent muslims are everywhere. It is impossible for muslims to attain emotional or intellectual maturity because islam forbids free thought, personal choice, skeptical inquiry, individuality, or creativity. If it's not spelled out in the unholy Qur'an, it is forbidden.
How could a person possibly become a mature adult when his religion dictates in excruciating detail how he must attend to bodily functions, sexual relations, hygeine, the proper way to put on clothing and shoes, to step across a threshold, to sleep, to get out of bed, pray, and the list goes on, ad nauseam. Muslims are programmed to hate, destroy, kill, and submit to allah, muhammad's alter ego. Temporal life is not for enjoyment, pleasure, or achievement, unless that achievement involves killing non-muslims and ruling the world.
Posted by: Susanp at September 19, 2006 11:25 PM
I've composed an essay on my blog in honor of Sister Leonella Sgorbati, the 65-year-old nun who the other day was shot in the back by two Muslims in Mogadishu likely in response to the Pope's speech. The essay is not only a tribute to her but also a plea for her to be canonized as a martyr and saint.
(If you open it in IE, you get to see a "special effect" at the end, which for some reason does not work in Firefox.)
Saint Leonella
http://hesperado.blogspot.com/2006/09/saint-leonella.html
at September 20, 2006 12:55 AM
We need to see apologies as tribute.
Our true wealth is our freedom and Islam only demands things that are truly valuable. Tribute does not have to be gold...children or freedom are a more bitter sacrifice.
Posted by: Peterborough at September 20, 2006 5:43 AM
@123
Actually nothing in Islam makes sense. But what do you expect when retards hijack Judaism (and throw in some Christianity, just to be on the safe side)? The result (Islam, the Koran, etc) is an embarassment to any intelligent human being.
Now Judaism does have some curses for the gentile. For example, during the Passover Seder, there is a plea to God to take vengeance on the enemies of Israel. You search hard and deep enough through Jewish liturgy and you will find some "islamic-style" curses. BUT THERE IS NO COMPARISON BETWEEN "THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL" AND THE DEGENERATE TRIBAL CREED KNOWN AS ISLAM. There is no prescription in Judaism for murdering innocent people who simply believe differently. That was part of the evil one's (muhammad) contribution
Another goofy example of the retarded religion known as Islam: In chapter 3 of the kooky koran it clearly states that Mary gave birth to Jesus without ever having been "touched by a man." It says: "ismuhu issa, misiichu" which means "His name is Jesus, Messiah." Yes, the kooky koran admits that Jesus was the Messiah.
Which is why I ask any and all Muslims who would dare discuss their goofy religion with me: "Why should I withdraw allegiance to the Messiah Jesus, King and Prince of Peace, and deposit it in a violent, self-annointed "prophet" who preaches murder and mayhem.
Why why why?
Posted by: Ynkedoodl2 at September 20, 2006 10:56 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.)