I have been watching, listening to, and reading all the multifarious mental junk that has been on offer on NPR and on CNN and on Fox, and at The Times and The Post and tutti quanti, and witnessing all these sudden scholars of terrorism, ranging from tough-guy ex-FBI agents to left-wing Democrats alike, offering every conceivable variety of obfuscation, misdirection, incomprehension, sheer nonsense — such as placing blame for the San Bernardino jihad terror attack on the “gun lobby.” This is because in this case the Muslim murderers in question used guns, so let’s all concentrate on the instrument used for the mass murder, and pay no attention to the ideology that prompted that particular use of that instrument.
I have heard repeatedly how what the heavy-lidded couple did “was a political act and had nothing to do with religion”; heard how they were “radicalized” here or there or possibly over there — though what that word “radicalized” would mean, i.e., following faithfully the dictates of Islam, no one seems interested in discussing. I have heard that the FBI has finally bravely concluded that “Yes, it was an act of terrorism,” but beyond that apparently daring declaration, nothing is said about what that “terrorism” was intended to do, or about how it was prompted by what texts of what religion.
Instead, we hold in our puzzled hands this mush-word “terrorism,” which has become a kind of free-floating Leibnizian monad unconnected to a particular faith Whose Name We Dare Not Speak. Our betters tell us they are still trying to puzzle out the whole mysterious business of that couple that was so mysteriously “radicalized.” They will still be puzzling it out during the next such attack, and the one after that, and the one after that. In the midst of all this, just possibly something like a hemidemisemiquaver of the truth will be allowed in.
I hate to think, of how today’s NPR and CNN and Fox and The Times and The Post would have covered the propagandists for Fascists and Nazis in the 1920s and 1930s. But this was happening even then. Why, no sooner had Mussolini made his March on Rome, and the Ventennio just started, than a certain Count Constantini was telling the society ladies of Boston about how wonderful that splendid fellow and his wonderful Blackshirts were: “Tells Mussolini’s aims and progress; Count Constantini Speaks at the Chilton Club Italy’s leader Has Won Whole Nation’s Confidence, He Says.” (Boston Daily Globe. Jan 16, 1923, p. 13)
In contrast to this disinformation to which we are daily subjected, no one should be embarrassed, much less apologetic, for daring to consider the evidence of his senses – that is, the Jihad news that mounts and mounts from all over the world, and especially that which demonstrates the cruel treatment of non-Muslims by Muslims wherever Muslims rule, save in a handful of cases where special circumstances have allowed for a taming or constraining – possibly temporary – of Islam, as in Kazakhstan or Kemalist Turkey. Nor should we be apologetic about becoming aware of the evidence provided in books, rather than from television reports or newspaper dispatches, by the historians of Islamic conquest: that is, the 1350-year history of the conquest of non-Muslim lands and the subsequent subjugation of the autochthonous non-Muslims. And we should be unapologetic about reading the scholars of Islam, such as C. Snouck Hurgronje, Joseph Schacht, Arthur Jeffery, and dozens of others, who wrote before Arab money and influence and other factors aided the Muslim takeover of many academic departments in the West having to do with Islam and related studies. And finally, we can read Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Wafa Sultan, Ibn Warraq, Magdi Allam, Nonie Darwish, and a growing list of other Defectors from the Army of Islam, whose articulate works, whose morally and intellectually advanced temoignages, can be compared with the deceit practiced by Muslim spokesmen who are given such credulous treatment by the formulators of popular opinion.
The West is now imperiled in a way unique in its history, mostly from an ideological pressure brought from within, and not by military pressure from without. Not everyone thinks we should simply throw up our hands and wail “but what can we do?” and “there’s nothing to be done.” There are those who are not, sometimes out of a mere want of imagination and intellect, able to figure out the many things that they could legitimately and rationally do to preserve (and perhaps even extend) the civilisational legacy they inherited. But there are also those who wish to protect it from its present-day most dangerous enemies, those who have not lost their senses, those who refuse to make burnt offerings of themselves or their children on the Altars of the Idols of the Age, Tolerance and Diversity – a limitless and unintelligent and even suicidal “Tolerance,” a diseased conception of “Diversity.” The latter group must regard with alarm and disgust the irresponsibility of the media coverage that has followed the San Bernardino murders.

jewdog says
The fact is, the West is ill served by Judeo-Christian ethics, because it is too tolerant, too forgiving, too inclusive, and much too weak to stand up to the ruthless take-no-prisoners morality of Islam. This should be evident by simply looking at the massive failure of Christianity ever since the Byzantine Empire fell to Islam. The only non-Muslim polity left is Israel, which hangs on despite the passive resistance of the Left and the ever-growing demographic of the ultra-Orthodox, those pious wimps who largely refuse to join the army.
Now, most of the establishment religious figures, like. Rabbi Lord Sacks, Bishop Webly, and Pope Francis, are pimping for the Syrian refugees, citing the claptrap of loving the stranger. They are paving the road to Hell with their naive intentions.
When it comes to Islam, nice guys finish last.
Bezelel says
It would be nice to get as many Christians as possible to watch “Sgt. York” the movie.
The only youtube available is in German. I came to the conclusion some time ago that, tolerance does not oblige me to co-sign bullsh!t. No good can come of it.
E Ward says
I believe the Old Testament has far more to say about political dominance than the New. Nor, do I believe, did the NT meant to do so. We recall that Christ said, “Render unto Caesar…” signaling that the Christian endeavor was not meant to supplant any current political system. I believe the value of Christianity lies in the more clearly expressed morals of the individual, however we can hearken back to the Old Testament to strengthen our resolve to continue to exist as a political entity, even to the point of war if necessary.
mortimer says
Jews and Christians equally believe in the Golden Rule, while the Golden Rule is absent from Islam.
Happy Hanukkah (correct English spelling) to our Jewish brothers and sisters in FREEDOM.
‘Love’ is ineffective without freedom to practice it.
Pong says
“Golden Rule” is very different in Judaism and Christianity. Jewish one is “..don’t do..” and the Christian “..do..” One is golden and another is gold plated.
Pong says
Sorry. Forgot for a second.
Marry Christmas to freedom loving christians.
Dmitriy Kalik says
😉
Spot On says
Jewdog, It makes one wonder if today’s version of “good” can really “overtake” evil, doesn’t it. Western Christians have had it too easy for too. The Islamic evil coming at us is battle hardened and primitive. During WWII, that was not the case. Christians were tough then. People in my area only got electricity in 1959. They were hardened and ready for a tough life. We will see how fast people harden up, with Muslims on their tail. Jesus was no pacifist yet many like to think He was. He said that someone who harms little children should have a millstone tied around their neck and thrown into the sea. These are not the words of a pacifist.
eduardo odraude says
Jesus was a pacifist with regard to the propagation of Christianity. But Christianity permits use of force to defend innocents from aggression. I don’t believe JC would have said one should only use words to stop murderers from attacking children or society. One of the disciples carried some kind of small sword. But it was not to be used on behalf of religion.
E Ward says
Hello Eduardo. I don’t believe Christ said anything about the use of force in the defense of the innocent. At least nothing that has survived. If you can quote the NT, I’d be interested in reading it. “Christianity” , however, is nebulous, and “says” a lot of things.
For the circumstances not addressed by Christ, we must use our rationality. Do we want western values to survive this era or not? Freedom of speech? Equality under the law? If we lose these things everything else goes to hell in a handbasket.
Lia Wissing says
I am a committed Christian, but I do not prayerfully ask G-d every morning whether I should get up, or make my bed, or wear my brown or black shoes, for I firmly believe that G-d expects me to use the sense He’s given me. So, if a person comes at me with a rock, screwdriver, knife, cleaver, sword I might let him/her be (because I’m 73 years old). But … should he/she threaten one of our children or grandchildren I shall not let him be! It’s that common sense thing …
BC says
According to the myths Jesus is alleged to have said if a man strike you turn the other cheek, so it seems he was a pacifist, unlike Mohammad for example, and what an example he is. However he never said what to do if the other cheek is struck, what do we do then, bow our necks for the sword?
If somebody strikes me he gets struck back with interest.
steamer says
Someone who harms little children should be required to die much more slowly and painfully. The so-called prophet of the Islamic “faith” apparently married a 6 yr old child!! Anyone know his address?
Lia Wissing says
Think of the size of the splash when the muslim parents, teachers & inciters who train muslim children with firearms and in beheading have their millstones tied on at last!
Jack Diamond says
The holy alliance did alright at the Battle of Lepanto and many other battles where they defeated the invading Mohammedans. However feeble Christian leadership today, there is precedence for something different. Not to mention a basis for the most absolute condemnation of Islam as antichrist and heresy. But then the Christians of former days had a lot of first hand experience with Islam, unlike our foolish contemporaries. The Christian faith does not preclude self-defense or defending others. And for anyone who believes this is also spiritual warfare, the Christian element is significant. The Muslims certainly think so.
Since secular ethics are providing an even weaker defense of western civilization, loyal to the idols of Tolerance and Diversity, betraying the West rather than defending it, where is the resistance going to come from? Maybe from having our backs to the wall. I am also familiar with a certain take-no-prisoners approach America has taken before when sufficiently threatened, provoked, and outraged. In fact, I suspect, unfortunately many casualties from now, a certain Islamic prophecy may actually come to pass:
Sahih Muslim Book 001, Number 0271:
“It is narrated on the authority of Ibn ‘Umar (‘Abdullah b. ‘Umar) that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) observed: Verily Islam started as something strange and it would again revert (to its old position) of being strange just as it started, and it would recede between the two mosques just as the serpent crawls back into its hole.”
Book 001, Number 0272:
“It is narrated on the authority of Abu Huraira that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Verily the faith would recede to Medina just as the serpent crawls back into its hole.”
eduardo odraude says
I may have been harping on this too much lately, but tolerance, diversity, and pluralism (as long as they don’t take suicidal forms) are surely what we desire to defend. The problem, as Hugh Fitzgerald’s piece implies, is not those values, but the suicidal forms of those values. Tolerance is suicidal when it goes so far as to accommodate totalitarian intolerance. Diversity is diseased when it embodies self-contradiction by elevating relativism into an absolute. Relativism is only a partial truth. Thus absolutes of a sort are real, and there is truth, though because we are fallible human beings in a relativized world, we can only sense the truth through a glass darkly, with what Peter Berger called “mellow certainty,” rather than perfect certainty.
We should be letting liberals know that the reason we don’t want more Islam is that it will gradually eliminate multiculturalism and substitute a totalitarian monoculture. Rather than attacking leftist buzzwords like “diversity” and “multiculturalism,” we need to point out that Islam tends to destroy diversity. Left and right need to unite to whatever extent possible to defend against the Islamic onslaught on open societies.
Katowice says
That may work (with plenty of effort) against legitimate liberals on the left. The problem is that those are becoming something of an endangered species. The predominant strain these days seems to be “progressive” totalitarian Marxism. What do you say to a willing slave who thinks he’ll be an overseer if he just stays ideologically pure enough through the purges? Look at what happens whenever Bill Maher starts speaking in even slightly accurate tones about the problem. They’re ready to eat him alive.
These are people who grew up on hard relativism, critical race theory, and Chomsky/Said “anti-imperialist” babble. I want to be hopeful, but where does the alliance come from? 9/11 had to happen for the pro-security, pro-western left (so much as it was) to emerge from the post-Cold War malaise. What actual liberals exist in the left probably aren’t long for it. I dread to think what it’ll take to squeeze the last few out.
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
… the West is ill served by Judeo-Christian ethics, because it is too tolerant, too forgiving, too inclusive, and much too weak to stand up to the ruthless take-no-prisoners morality of Islam.
You’ve got that right. When a Jihad mass murder is done our media focuses down on the perps. Almost 15 yrs later, I’m wondering just how tiny that tiny minority actually is. If there ever was a moment to challenge the reserve status of a religion Islam enjoys, it was Sept 12, 2001. Now 14 dead pales in comparison. Take the chant at the soccer game in Turkey. A week after that we’ve got a leading presidential candidate hot-stepping on whether they celebrated on the streets of Jersey City and Paterson.
How about some publicity for the belief system itself? Fight until there is no God but Allah seems plain enough to me. One wonders why all the mystery surrounding Moslems.
Steve the queen says
Not all in the west are christian. And those that claim to be are not full on “bible bashers”, “turn the other cheek” crowd.
And those Christians that are “bible bashers” wont stand for this jihad nonsense in their good communities.
The problem isn’t your perception of weaknes within Christianty but the marxist domination of public discourse via the msm and schooling.
mahghan says
“Liberal” not “Marxist”. What does Marxism have to do with “religious tolerance and “diversity”? Marx had much ideological contempt for religion.
Mo says
@ jewdog
“The fact is, the West is ill served by Judeo-Christian ethics, because it is too tolerant, too forgiving, too inclusive, and much too weak to stand up to the ruthless take-no-prisoners morality of Islam.”
Nonsense. The Judeo-Christian ethic DEMANDS we stand up against evil and fight it to the end.
dumbledoresarmy says
Yes.
There are two things we can draw upon.
For Christians, there is the well-developed and carefully-thought-out Just War doctrine; I think it was first articulated by Saint Augustine.
For Jews – and Christians would do well to reflect upon it as well, in this context, for I believe it could throw further light upon the deep biblical and Jewish underpinnings of our historic concept of Just War – there is the concept of Milhemeth Mitzvah. Not so much a ‘just’ as an ‘obligatory’ or ‘necessary’ war. Not something one enters into lightly, either.
There is a very good exposition of the concept in this column by a Jewish woman who lives in Israel, and whose third son has just entered the army of Israel, the IDF. There on the frontline against the Jihad. She *knows* what Islam is about. So do her sons. They know that the jihad must be resisted, absolutely, unremittingly.
Two links. She published it first as a column in Israel National News.
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Blogs/Message.aspx/4922
“Things You Don’t Want Your Kids to Know”.
(Except, of course, that in order to stay alive they *have* to know these things…).
And at her excellent blog, “A Soldier’s Mother” (which I recommend: excellent reading; special shoutout to anyone lurking here, from Canada or USA or Australia or France or the UK or for that matter, Russia, who is the mother or sister or daughter or wife or girlfriend of young men who serve or have served in the army of your country and will therefore very likely have found himself in the badlands of the dar al Islam; you will find yourself able to relate to much that Paula says)
http://israelisoldiersmother.blogspot.com.au/2012/02/things-you-dont-want-your-kids-to-know.html
Here’s the meat of it:
“…And so we came to the concept of bending or breaking some of the commandments during wartime and that led to the concept of Milhement Mitzvah.
“A milhemeth mitzvah is an obligatory war. I sometimes wonder if the misguided concept of Jihad in Islam is a distortion of the concept of milhemet mitzvah.
(For a great source on contradictions and outright inaccuracies in the Koran, see this great site: Answering Islam.)
“Anyway, we talked about the concept of an obligatory war and that’s when Shmulik knocked me off my feet (not in the literal sense, of course) – “every day here [that is, in Israel – dda] is a milhemet mitzvah,” he said.
[And now, I would add, that although most of our population do not know it, and many of our religious and political leaders deny it, the whole of the non-Muslim world has been in such a war ever since the Ummah first began to attack its non-Muslim neighbours in every direction. America is in a milhemet mitzvah. So is the UK. So is France. So are Kenya, and Ethiopia. So is Russia. So is India. All, all, all of us. Because the Jihad never stops and the Jihad is intended to utterly destroy us, our present, our past, and our future, and drag us down forever into the living death of a global sharia despotism. – dda]
“And before I could adequately process that, he told me what I’ve always known, and something I wish my children didn’t, “they want to destroy us completely – so every day is a milhemet mitzvah,” he concluded.
“An obligatory war is one that is fought because there is no choice – because if you don’t fight, your enemies will.
“The Arabs [sic: THE MUSLIMS – dda] will shoot rockets at our cities, sneak into our homes and murder our babies.
“They will fight without honor, without bravery, and sneak off to murder what and when they can.
“An obligatory war is fought against the Samir Kuntars of the world, the Hassan Nassrallahs, and yes, even the ones who claim to be moderate in English, while calling for our destruction in Arabic.
“These are the ones who would kill a father in front of his little girl, and then murder her as well with their bare hands, or murder a three-month-old baby girl, or stab a three-year-old in the heart.
“**An obligatory war is one that is fought against an enemy that does not want peace and will not let you live in peace, no matter what you do, no matter what you give.** {and that applies not only to Israel, but to the entire Infidel world. Thailand, Philippines, Russia, every country that has ever ‘negotiated’ with Muslims in a ‘peace process’, needs to know this. The Ummah does not want peace, and will not let us live in peace, no matter what we do or what we give. – dda}
“Though the Torah speaks of absolving a man in his first year of marriage from going to war, it also explains that in a milhemet mitzvah, even the groom should leave his wedding canopy (chuppah).
“This is what Aharon Karov did in the Gulf War, when he was seriously wounded. This is what others did – the soldier who missed his son’s circumcision ceremony; fathers whose sons and daughters were born while they were in Gaza…”.
jewdog says
Yes, I’m a great admirer of Paula Stern. I particularly like her annual Ghetto Mentality Award. Last year, it went to an ultra-Orthodox Rabbi from Amsterdam who was beaten up by a Muslim but said that he didn’t hold it against his attacker as obviously the poor guy didn’t know that his victim was an anti-Zionist Jew.
Sure, we have our Joshuas and Davids, but we also have way too many Chomskys and Fisks.
The Judeo-Christian system is great for a society’s internal structure, but can be lacking when the barbarians are at the gate.
John van Vliet says
I read often about Judea / Christian ethics and values in the west, But I disagree with this, for the west is n infiltrated by humanist and socialist and have been able to change the Values that were ones indeed solidly based on Judea/Christian values, this is NO LONGER the case the secular bleeding heart society rules and feel that the poor muslims are victims….. and like Obama they are apologetic towards the brutal killers of fanatical islam. Tha is the problem we facing to day that is why nobody takes action, until it is to late….Europe totally secular allows the muslims to do what ever they want, taking parts of cities and declare it muslim territory etc.
Not long from now you have the same in Canada and the US and in some cases this has already started…. We , the tolerant are allowing the intolerant take away our freedoms and slowly but surely Islam is getting a stronger foothold, exactly as Moh told them in the Quran how to accomplish that… and be successful………
So what we do ?? just let it happen and become passive ???
Kepha says
Jewdog: Happy Chanukah. Neither you nor I regard the books of the Maccabees as Holy Writ, yet I think we’re allowed to regard them as edifying reading (like Bunyan’s _Pilgrim’s Progress_ for a lot of us Anglophone Protestant Christians, even if they were written as popular history rather than fiction or allegory). It seems that Judas Maccabaeus arose to fight Antiochus and his desecration of the Temple after some Chasidim got themselves massacred for (1) standing up for their tradition and (2) refusing to fight on the Sabbath.
We also have David Son of Jesse leading an insurgent ban after Saul tried to pin him to the wall with a spear; and before him, the Judges. We have Moses before Pharaoh. Throw into all of this Moses’ admonition (Dt. 17) that the monarch should be subject to Torah (rule of law!) and Samuel’s warning about the manner of a king. On my side of our divide, we have Simon and Yohannan telling the High Priest that they had to obey God rather than men. Both apostles of the Messiah also described persecuting Rome as “Babylon”, the Old Testament code for oppression, violence, corruption, idolatry, and confusion. Jesus himself celebrated Chanukah, that remembrance of both deliverance from enemies and God’s miraculous provision (John 10). All of these examples are drawn from the pages of what I regard as holy Scripture; and several are from what Jews regard as Holy Scripture.
Yes, I describe myself as a small-P pacifist. But that only means that we think peace is better than war; that as much as it is up to us, we should strive for peace with all; that spreading the faith by violence does not reflect the Messiah’s expressed marching orders; and that vengeance is best left to the state. For Christians like me, there are times when the just war doctrine may be invoked, but it isn’t something we ardently desire. Further, for those of us in the Reformed (“Calvinist”) tradition, we also recognize that in some situations, revolt is authorized.
Our Christian ethical system (much of which is admittedly shared with Judaism) is thus a system for building and preserving society. Islamic ethics are a system made to justify war and robbery.
I see the weakening of the West not as a product of Judaeo-Christian ethics, but as stemming from the wholesale abandoning of those ethics in favor of a highly present-oriented, hedonistic, and relativist ethical system
Dmitriy Kalik says
Wow, statement of the year; how eloquent. A simple solution would be to close the porous borders and elect a more competent gvt.
Don McKellar says
Good piece. It’s as if I’ve slipped into an alternative universe whenever I turn on the TV or computer and see the news presented by mainstream media. It’s as if Muhammad has become a contemporary Big Brother — ruling like a puppet master from the shadowy hell in the beyond where he exists in the hearts of evil men. We never voted for him, never sanctioned Islam, have nothing but contempt for its vile teachings — and yet the mainstream media and government officials believe we must all bow to sharia law in our public sphere. And never, ever must any investigative journalism and integrity get in the way, for that would demand that Islam be publicly put on trial and exposed for what it is. You must never speak ill of Big Brother Muhammad.
Jack Diamond says
“The latter group must regard with alarm and disgust the irresponsibility of the media coverage that has followed the San Bernardino murders.”
Alarm because this mindset, this immovable mountain, guarantees many, many more such murders. Fourteen years (and 27,000+ deadly Islamic terror attacks) after 9/11. The “dictates of Islam” are still not to be spoken of. The example of Muhammad is still never to be invoked. The bloody tyrannic history of Islam is still not to be taught, nor our ancestors life and death struggles with their historic adversary, the enemy of Christendom and Western Civilization (and every other civilization), remembered. Not in the mainstream media. Disgust because this could all have been averted.
PRCS says
Bbbubut, I always think of Basque separatists when I hear the word “terrorist”.
Am I the only one?
Angemon says
Are Basques the IRA? I get confused with this fuzzy “extreme ideologies” terminology that refuses to call a spade a spade.
Steve the queen says
Basques are from the Spanish North. The IRA are Irish. Though the Basque and ira did provide each other political, ideological, financial and military support.
Mathew Solo says
Since the Civil War When the very great Man and President Abraham Lincoln faced slanderous News Mongers…who were literally attacking the nation …by slandering our efforts to prosecute a Very serious and dangerous war…they caused severe harm in so many ways…then members of His Staff went after them…even jailing some speedily (by suspending Habeas corpus).
Oh What A Tangled Web We Weave When First We Practice To Deceive.
Liam1304 says
“The West is now imperiled in a way unique in its history, mostly from an ideological pressure brought from within,…”
Wonderful article Hugh. However may I suggest that you read Diana West’s book: “American Betrayal” (if you haven’t already read it).
This book reveals how we got in this mess and it is exactly because of the same ideological betrayal and cowardice. This is where it got in.
All the best
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
I’m a big fan of Diana West. She took the measure of disgust called for by Fitzgerald here. She got so sick and tired of it that she quit writing her syndicated column. Lord knows what she couldn’t publish. Or take Fitzgerald, I’ve found myself clicking around New English Review hoping to see new essays by him, and when I don’t find them my thought is well, maybe he’s thrown up his arms in disgust too. He knows it does little good to say I told you so. But he’s back, drawn out by the absolutely awful reportage of the past week. There’s no fun in resisting Islam; it’s a grim business.
vlparker says
I quit watching most FOX shows over a year ago. I still watched The Kelly File until she acted like she was from CNN in the first debate. I haven’t watched her since. I still watch Hannity only if Robert, Pamela Geller or Mark Steyn are on. About the only FOX host I could take any more was Lou Dobbs on FOX Business, so that’s what I turned on the night of the San Bernardino islamic jihad slaughter. About 10 minutes into the broadcast I turned it off in disgust. Just like you say, they were twisting themselves up into pretzels in order to avoid stating the obvious. These cowards are selling out their country. They are willing to sell their granddaughters and great-granddaughters down the road to islamic slavery rather than oppose the vile evil of islam. They are beneath contempt.
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
Steyn and Spencer are the perfect complement. One is an honest-to-God intellectual, in the true sense of that now threadbare term; the other is a master of verbal skills, he’s so good that he almost makes watching this slow motion disaster funny. But gallows humor wears on a person, not that I’m blaming either, they do the dirty work I’m not capable of doing and wouldn’t have the stomach to do even if I could.
vlparker says
I know how you feel. I can’t think of anything that I care less about than islam. Yet, care I must. After two minutes of reading about it I’m sick of the whole damn thing. I don’t know how Robert can dedicate his life to its study, but I thank God that he does.
vlparker says
And Hugh. Didn’t mean to dis him after he wrote this article. He and Robert also are always making me get out the dictionary. Temoignages? Never heard that word before in my 60 years on this planet.
HRW says
I too have missed Hugh Fitzgerald’s essays and like Alarmed Pig Farmer, often check at The Iconoclast for his posts.
Each of Hugh’s essays is like a breath of fresh air, or perhaps like stepping through time into a university lecture hall, one which hasn’t yet been infected by PC/MC cancer.
And, like vlparker, I often find myself with additional ‘assignments’ necessary to complete in order to benefit most from Hugh’s articulate scholarship. Today, for example, I needed to look up a few terms he used:
As well as finding myself checking my heavily bookmarked personal library of authors Hugh has recommended frequently in years past :
C. Snouck Hurgronje, Joseph Schacht, Arthur Jeffery.
I credit this site for introducing the treasure of Hugh’s scholarship, and often link back to this site’s archives.
As for the “Mainstream Media’s Multifarious Mental Junk”, it appears many more are refusing to buy into insane suicidal political narratives and are becoming far more vocal about it:
Lt. Col. Ralph Peters calls Obama a pussy to Fox News Stuart Varney
Rep. Peter King: We Should ABSOLUTELY Monitor Muslims – And Give Medal to Cops for Doing It (VIDEO)
Arab TV Host Suggests Congress Deal With Obama in Harsh Way Over Downplaying Terrorist Threat a Week Before San Bernardino Attack Media
Judge Jeanine Pirro’s epic rant
Sheriff Joe Arpaio calls on citizens to carry guns
Ultster County, NY Sheriff Asks Citizens To Arm Themselves
Sullivan County, NY Sheriff, Michael Schiff concurs with
Ulster County Sheriff Paul Van Blarcum that licensed gun owners should carry
their licensed handguns
Milwaukee County (WI) Sheriff, David Clarke
Liberty University president encourages students to carry guns on campus
Former Congressman Joe Walsh to Loretta Lynch “Prosecute Me”
Trump Calls For Moratorium On Muslims Entering United States
Rudy Giuliani: ‘You’re A Moron’ If You Don’t Think San Bernardino Shooting Was Terrorism (Video)
There are many more…and surely many more to come as it becomes abundantly apparent there aren’t enough hours in a day for Loretta Lynch to keep up with the tide she unleashed with her treasonous threat.
Dave J says
NPR currently relaying the words of a Texas Imam telling us about the “hospitality and good manners” of Muslims and amplifying the complaints by CAIR about the awful Islamophobia being shown to them.
Meanwhile all the families affected by Paris and San Bernadino are still mourning their loved ones, the actual victims of real violence, not some imaginary “phobia”.
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
… he deceit practiced by Muslim spokesmen who are given such credulous treatment by the formulators of popular opinion.
This key thought brings up the idea of responsibility. Krauthammer and O’Reilly are in the analyst role, so where’s the analysis, as in where is the truth? Connect the dots, account for all the salient facts. Those in the reporter role deserve mountains of shame for what does not get reported, but they can blame their obvious failings on their editors. Who’s editing Krauthammer, Mr. Harvard Smart Guy? Where are you, Charles, where are your facts and where is your truth. And don’t you dare hide behind the “I’m a Jew and so must recuse myself on this one” doggerel. Islam *is* the one, the big one, bigger and badder than even communism. Shake but don’t stir some WMD into the mix and you’ve got an enormous proportion.
PRCS says
On last Thursday’s show, BOR got the “good Muslim” idea completely backward; asserting that they reject violence, or some such.
As a teenager I would periodically have a cheeseburger on Friday, making me a “bad” Catholic.
It’s hard to imagine that he really believes what he said.
HRW says
A recent example of the ‘good muslim’ media pundits like Bill O’Reilly reflect upon is found in the televised statement provided for mass consumption in response to the San Bernardino terror jihad:
CNN version
Terror linked CAIR spokesman, Muzammil Siddiqi, formerly head of ISNA, now the chairman of the Fiqh Council of North America and the North American Islamic Trust repeated the disingenuous and hypocritical admonitions against terror.
Fast forward to 1:28 in the linked video to hear Siddiqi suggest:
If human life is so precious Islamic doctrine wouldn’t characterize Christians and Jews as pigs and apes. Siddiqi’s clever prose illustrates exactly how deceptive such soothing words uttered by representative’s of Islam deceive. Simply put, Islamic doctrine does not consider kuffar/infidels to be human.
Clever parsing is just one of the tools amid Taqiyya and Muruna used by these deceptive representatives of Islam.
CSPI’s Bill Warner Bill Warner put together a terrific presentation on Statistical Islam from which I quote:
Most of the doctrinal material dedicated to ‘kafirs’ (or ‘kufar’ – a derogatory term for unbelievers/infidel) is quite unpleasant.
Wellington says
“The West is now imperiled in a way unique in its history…….”
Of all the statements in this excellent article by Fitzgerald I would argue that this is the one most key since the West is now threatened again by a mortal enemy but (and this is the unique and exceedingly lethal aspect) we dare not name that enemy. Herein lies the uniqueness of this particular mortal danger to liberty, to all the West. It is political correctness taken to literally lethal levels, not just for individuals but potentially for an entire civilization.
Madness. Pure madness.
Asdis says
It seems to me that the countries that got out from under the dead hand of Islam could only take back their cultures by expelling Muslims – think of Spain, of Sicily.
The media are stupefied that Donald Trump is the clear frontrunner and increasingly nervous as we slide into 2016. He’s not my candidate, but as of today I would not be at all surprised if he wins. Our effete media have utterly failed to address any real concerns of their readers, preferring propriety over inquiry. And shunning anyone who questions the party line. That is why at first they laughed and now they worry every time Trump comes spinning like the Tasmanian Devil into the middle of the latest mass murder and upends their proper, don’t-worry-go-back-to-sleep coverage. While the media dismiss Trump’s statements about banning further Muslim immigration, it fails to realize that one comment just won him a huge number of voters.
Ce says
One of the best articles ever written on Jihadwatch (and there have been hundreds).
Thank you for a brilliant message that needs to be repeated and repeated and repeated.
Ce
KABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM says
Watching CNN – enforced by progressive room-mate – and they just brought on the ‘imam’ Feisal Abdul Rauf – the piece of human excrement behind the 9/11 ground zero mosk initiative. I despise this pig almost as much as I despise the fraud barry soetoro in the White house.
mortimer says
Hugh Fitzgerald is right Western elites and journalists are serving up a lot of JUNK THINKING about Islam.
They have not read the Sira, hadiths or Koran or Sharia law, and yet, they present themselves as authorities on all of them! Preposterously and monstrously beyond arrogant!
When will their egregious FRAUD be denounce by real authorities of Islam? It will not come from mullahs who defend Islam through Taqiyya. It will not come from Western dhimmi scholars who are paid by Saudi Arabia to tell comforting lies and betray us! It will have to come from a new generation of independent scholars who care about the truth and factual information.
Sadly, they are not to be found in journalism. Even editors haven’t any knowledge of Islam and abandon their responsibility to learn about it.
We need a new Churchill today. Churchill actually read what the Nazis were saying and realized a brutal war was coming. Why do our leaders betray us today to Islamism? The next generation of Muslims will follow through on World War III.
Why do the Western elites not see it?
UNCLE VLADDI says
“DIVERSITY” MEANS: “YOU MUST TOLERATE AND SUBMIT TO THE OPPOSITE (i.e: CRIMINAL’S) POINT OF VIEW!”
Criminals all think the same way: they know they are guilty, so they make up excuses for their crimes. Even if they remember they weren’t actually guilty, making up excuses (fraud) is still itself a crime!
Liberals are criminals. As such, they make up victimology excuses for themselves and other criminals.
They do it because of their static immoral relativism idolatry, to excuse everyone via the argumentum tu quoque: “Since everyone is born the same/equal, therefore everyone also always stays the same!”
Liberals pretend that, since all humans of all breeds (“races”) are born equally tabula-rasa as blank slates, and they are all (initially) all the same, that therefore any and all “cultural” traditions (habits) will also always be the same, and turn out the same way! But multiculturalism IS racism!
That’s only pretending a criminal twin isn’t a criminal, because his innocent twin still isn’t one.
Such backwards tautologies are the liberal criminal excuse-makers’ bread-and-butter.
But when they claim all cultures are the same, (because nurture has no effect) then the only valid conclusion one can draw from different countries (like the islamic ones in Africa) being so far behind all the others, developmentally, would be due to nature (i.e: hardware; genetics; “race”)!
Since unprincipled liberals are in denial of reality, the symptoms of their assertions never line up!
Liberals should ask them selves: “How much respect would I imagine I’d get from my swarthy friends if I was one of them, and I was still a proud race-traitor, but I sold them all out to whitey instead?”!
Their flaw is masochism, where they pretend they can “control” their fears BY causing those very same worst-case scenario problems (like by antagonizing other people) which cause the pains they fear the most. And their submissive racism is a direct result of their habitual masochism.
I’ve never seen a crime or perversion a liberal didn’t want to immediately compromise with or Submit to. Liberals assert:
“If we don’t rush in first, some other fools might beat us to it!”
Liberals are disgusting, reactionary, cowardly traitors: “We have to let the violent criminals do what they want to us, or else they’ll do what they want to us anyway!”
Beyond that, all they’ve got is victim-blaming slander: mirroring, reflecting and “projecting” their own hatefully bigoted racist mind-set and crimes onto everyone else, too!
Their misery not only loves, but NEEDS company in which to dilute itself.
Which is why they will always argue from the ‘argumentum tu quoque’ (“it’s not an evil crime because we – i.e: you – all do it, too!”) asserting that the wrongful extortion of group might always makes the comparison of an unrelated wrong into a right.
Matthieu Baudin says
“.. And finally, we can read Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Wafa Sultan, Ibn Warraq, Magdi Allam, Nonie Darwish, and a growing list of other Defectors from the Army of Islam, whose articulate works, whose morally and intellectually advanced temoignages, can be compared with the deceit practiced by Muslim spokesmen who are given such credulous treatment by the formulators of popular opinion…”
That’s right, our ‘progressive’ opinion leaders don’t want to touch the articulate Apostates from Islam listed above and others including Ali Sina, but instead go straight to the old established voices of Islamic authority, the Muslim community spokesman, religious leaders and lobby groups; and protect them as if they were some precious social relics that need to be safeguarded from an advancing universal modern civilisation.