Thursday, September 09, 2010

In response to "We can't go to war with Islam"

Millions of Muslims ARE peaceful. But that does not abrogate our responsibility to correctly identity our enemy and their motivation? Khomeini is still considered a major authority on Islamic doctrine.

“Those who know nothing of Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those [who say this] are witless. Islam says: Kill all the unbelievers just as they would kill you all! Does this mean that Muslims should sit back until they are devoured by [the unbelievers]? Islam says: Kill them, put them to the sword and scatter [their armies]…. Islam says: Whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword and in the shadow of the sword! People cannot be made obedient except with the sword! The sword is the key to Paradise, which can be opened only for the Holy Warriors! There are hundreds of other [Qur’anic] psalms and Hadiths [sayings of the Prophet] urging Muslims to value war and to fight. Does all this mean that Islam is a religion that prevents men from waging war? I spit upon those foolish souls who make such a claim.”

However, those millions still have not denounced or rejected the violent members of Islam. If they did, they would be considered apostates. The tenets of Islam include instructions on the proper use of deceit, violence, and subterfuge against unbelievers. I believe that the majority of Muslims do not want war with the west. However, their silence means that the warmongers in their culture are in charge.

Any criticism of Islam is met with threats or acts of violence. In their eyes, there is no valid criticism. They cannot conceive of the irony of rioting with signs stating “Death to critics of Islam” because the west has said that Islam is a violent religion.

We may not feasibly declare war on all Muslims, but that does not prevent treating any Muslim that advocates violence as an outcast. If an immigrant, deport them. If a country advocates violence, shun them. If its a citizen of the US, treat them accordingly as any that promotes violence. There are laws against that. We need to stop treating them with PC kid gloves and giving into there demands that we change because something offends them. Do we change anything to not offend Christians, Jews, Hindus? Are the Amish or Hasidim any less conservative? The difference is that they don’t demand that a culture or region accommodate them. They adapt. Whole regions of Europe are slowly becoming dhimmified. Women in parts of Norway and Sweden cannot go about in short skirts or blouses without being in danger of rape. Said rapists have declared that women not properly covered are asking for it. Courts in those areas have punished them, but, published that women should dress “modestly” to prevent those attacks.

Mark Steyn says it well. General Napier’s quote is apropos.

At some point we have to face down a culture in which not only the mob in the street but the highest judges and academics talk like crazies. Abdul Rahman embodies the question at the heart of this struggle: If Islam is a religion one can only convert to, not from, then in the long run it is a threat to every free person on the planet.

In a more culturally confident age, the British in India were faced with the practice of “suttee” – the tradition of burning widows on the funeral pyres of their husbands. Gen. Sir Charles Napier was impeccably multicultural:

“You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: When men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks, and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours.”

So, we must face down the “customs” of Islam that do not accommodate the free traditions of the West. We ARE in a war with Islam for the hearts and minds of the world. We must trumpet the superiority of our way of life. We must confidently denounce the barbarity of some Muslim practices. We must understand that many Muslim organizations, though peaceful, are supporters of Islamic jihad and the advancement of Sharia throughout the world. And that includes the imam of the “9/11 Victory Mosque. We must demand and end to fatwas demanding the death of converts or honor killings, or,…well, the list is long.

At its basic nature and tenets, Islam is not compatible with western ideals. So either it must change or we must change. Which would you prefer?

Labels:

|

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home