Pajamas Media

98 Comments

1. Lisette:

The Left’s reaction to Islamic terrorism has always confused me. They always say that the terrorists are “preverting” their religion. Do they realise how patronising that is? At most, Western liberals have taken a college course in Islamic history, read a few extracts from the Koran and read some interviews with “moderate Muslims”. Yet they truly believe that they know more about Islam than someone who has studied it their whole life. Unbelieveable.

May 25, 2009 - 2:42 am 2. Steve:

The Muslims who use terrorism to enact jihad are only practicing what the Islamic texts teach. Ergo, they ar “good” Muslims.

There may be moderate (non observant) Muslims but there is no moderate Islam. “Moderate” misinterpret or do not follow the Islamic texts. They have no text support for their views> Islam always wins out over this small if not somewhat fictive group.

Bush and his supporters never understood this because if they did they would have stopped ALL Muslim immigration immediately after 9/11. They also would not have CONTINUED to have our troops engaged in wars in 2 countries ONCE the only goal became to give them a democracy so they could freely install Sharia Law based governments.

That is the goal and obligation of all Muslims. They are commanded by Islam to wage jihad whenever possible. That means to either convert, kill, subjugate or enslave all non believers and to INSTALL SHARIA LAW. Terrorism is just one tool used to accomplish this goal. Invading us through our insane immigration laws is another. In the Muslims opinion, immigration is a more effective option at the moment.

We are helping them to install 2 Sharia based governments while letting them invade us at home. Also note the perseution of Christians not only in Iraq and Afghanistan but throught the Muslim world.

Obama and his band of Lefties could care less about this. They freely go to bed with Islam. Mulims in our country represent more Democratic votes. They also have a shared didain if not hatred for America its constitution and Christianity.

This inholy alliance makes me yearn for the days of the Bush administration.

God Help us.

May 25, 2009 - 3:36 am 3. cedarhill:

There are practising Muslims and non-practicing Muslims just like their are practising Christians and non-practising Christians. All practising Muslims are either actual terrorists or supporters of terrorism. All practising Muslims support and/or follow sharia. Thanks God there are so many non-practising Muslims. If only liberals could become non-practising Muslims as well.

May 25, 2009 - 4:02 am 4. susan:

“Bush and his supporters never understood this because if they did they would have stopped ALL Muslim immigration immediately after 9/11.”

this was the only solution, also making life impossible for muslims in western land is a good way, forbid all kinds of veil, forbid to build mosques, charge them with hatred speech (90% of koran is hatred speech). It is surely LESS than how is the treatment of christians in their lands.

May 25, 2009 - 4:22 am 5. Walt:

I continue to ask the same questions, why does any nation permit the immigration of Muslims? Why aren’t those Muslims who are advocating sharia or jihad deported?

Between the Muslims and illegal Latin-Americans,
this country’s immigration polices are going to be the ruin of everything we hold dear.

And the real shame of it all is that the liberals/progressives condone this situation because they put the illegal’s votes before the welfare of the nation.

May 25, 2009 - 4:24 am 6. Perry:

The one most important principle in ithe Koran is “Takiyya”. That is permission, encouragement actually, for Muslims to lie and deceive their enemies (all Infidels) if such deceit helps to advance the cause of Islam.

In short, Muslims LIE just as Mohammed did – sanctioned by the Koran.

May 25, 2009 - 4:32 am 7. John:

Unfortunately, it appears that, at best, Islam is a carbuncle on the rear end of humanity.

May 25, 2009 - 5:39 am 8. Broadsword:

Wow, thank God Gitmo is such a tiny place, or there’d be another 20 or 30 more Somalia’s on that list because of it.

May 25, 2009 - 5:41 am 9. dmgold:

The US is following Eurabia into the quagmire of multiculturism. The 2nd largest city in Holland, Rotterdam now has a muslim majority and this demographic transformation happened over a period of less than 30 years. I strongly recommend that every one reads the link below (from the catholic church)and see what awaits the USA if it carries on with the multi cultural path supported by a politically correct polity and an activist left wing Judiciary.

Sharia awaits all who believe in secular/left wing liberalism. Those who dont believe in their own traditions will raise their hands and submit(its easier you know).

http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1338480?eng=y

May 25, 2009 - 5:55 am 10. Fragmentarian:

Au contraire, while they would, on the surface, seem to be odd bedfellows, it would appear that “the left” and Islamists are actually fellow travellers. Therefore they follow the same axiom. “No ememies to the left.”

May 25, 2009 - 6:27 am 11. David:

And Hussien Obama bowing to the sheiks was no big thing and all of us domestic terrorist (conservatives)were just making up nonsense and trouble.
Obama knew exactly what that bow meant and so did the Islamic world.
Our immigrant Muslim POTUS will have Sharia Law replace the Constitution and to hell with all the Infidels.
I am not a nutroot neocon !
Hussein Obama’s actions speak louder than his words.
I would love to be wrong,but I am not going to take that bet.

May 25, 2009 - 6:27 am 12. Alex Bensky:

You have failed, Mr. Steinberg, to understand what really motivates Muslims, and you are fortunate to have readers like me who can edify you.

The source of all Muslim violence and discontent everywhere is obviously Israeli settlements and overall intransigence. That’s the cause of everything that’s wrong in the world.

May 25, 2009 - 6:41 am 13. tanstaafl:

…yet the ones we now call liberals…have access to enough logic and reason for a bombproof conclusion, yet they refuse to pass judgment.

Most of the ones we now call liberals have been conditioned to be followers and simply parrot the knee jerk bromides of their handlers. They wouldn’t recognize honest intellectual inquiry if it bit them in the backside.

So withholding judgment in favor of a thorough self-examination becomes a fraud, a half-measure. It becomes a permanently withheld judgment, which is no approach at all.

Sounds like a perfect description of the current US President’s Iran and North Korea policies.

Is it racist to think Islam is inherently violent?

Who the hell cares ? Individuals who have co-opted certain passages in the Koran and interpreted those passages to mean that it is the duty of a good Muslim to conduct violent jihad against “the unbeliever” are inherently violent. That’s really all I need to know.

Winston Churchill wrote tellingly of Mohammedanism over a century ago.

Mark Twain had it pretty well wired as well in the 19th century.

“When I, a thoughtful and unblessed Presbyterian, examine the Koran, I know that beyond any question every Mohammedan is insane, not in all things, but in religious matters. I cannot prove to him that he is insane, because you never can prove anything to a lunatic — for that is a part of his insanity and the evidence of it.” – Mark Twain

May 25, 2009 - 7:14 am 14. wildman:

There is no misinterpretation of islam. The is no such thing as a moderate islam. The koran is the word of god and not subject to change or revision. Anyone who believes otherwise is deluding themselves. The islamic culture is stagnate and retrograde. Whats curious is that if the koran is the word of god, what need do the practitioners have of Imans, Caliph’s etc to interpret the koran? We need to expel them from our midst.

May 25, 2009 - 7:30 am 15. Morry Rotenberg:

Islam has been at war with the unbelievers since it’s founding in the 7th century. Violence in the past has not led to a lasting victory for them. They have discovered that democratic political correctness and western ideals of fairness plus the active uteri of their subjugated women will ultimately lead to victory in the modern era.

May 25, 2009 - 7:39 am 16. tanstaafl:

Wow, thank God Gitmo is such a tiny place, or there’d be another 20 or 30 more Somalia’s on that list because of it.

This President is so absurdly disingenuously naive when he makes the statement that “Gitmo” has added to/inflamed terrorism, whatever. …what ? they’re gonna behead us more quickly, bomb our trains and buildings with more panache, because of “gitmo” ?

What Obama might say (if he wanted to be something besides self-righteous) is that incarceration of head honchos (Gitmo or on the moon, it doesn’t matter) is a very big deal to radical Islamists.

As far as the ACLU lawyer-orchestrated hand wriging over Gitmo (even KSM finds those lawyers repugnant), it’s another reason for “terrorists” all over the world to laugh themselves silly over the insipid and pathetic infidel.

May 25, 2009 - 7:48 am 17. Self-hating Boomer:

Ceaderhill, I’ll settle for liberals becoming non-practicing leftists. The essential difference between Clinton and 0bama is that the latter is a devout practicing leftist, whereas the former is a fallen away leftist. You can reason with them.

May 25, 2009 - 8:23 am 18. James:

#12 ALEX BENSKY: I hope you are simply playing the jokester and don’t really believe what you wrote. I am sure you are, but just in case, let me point a few things out for you. Well before 1948 Muslims of the Middle-east engaged in hatred and mass violence against Jews, because Jew were Jews and not Muslims. Recall that in 627 A.D. Muhammad ordered the execution of the last tribe of Jews in Medina (Banu Qurayzah). They were all decapitated and the headless bodies thrown collectively into a ditch (a great foreboding of the mass slaughter of Jew in Europe 1300 year later). There’s example after example of such aggression. Muhammad was a warrior/conqueror, not a man of peace, not a man that delivered a great “peaceful” religion. Any right thinking person who has studied the relevant history can come to no other conclusion. Try to remember recent history. As soon as the modern state of Israel was created, the surrounding Arab states enaged in a combined war with total destruction as the goal. This preceded the present settlements, which Israel, if you will recall, mostly abandoned in recent years (with the exception of a few). Just prior to the creation of Israel, the arabs remained hostile to Jews as a people. There was a leading Muslim cleric (who’s name now escapes me, be who held the title of “Mufti”) who was a great friend to Hitler and gave weekly radio broadcasts from Germany inciting Muslims everywhere to join the facist cause and “kill Jews everywhere”. Your logic (if you’re not joking) only proves up the thesis of the story: liberals without an understanding of history coming to half-baked, thoughtless conclusions, which if implemented as policy endanger all of us. Thanks!

May 25, 2009 - 8:25 am 19. tanstaafl:

The source of all Muslim violence and discontent everywhere is obviously Israeli settlements and overall intransigence. That’s the cause of everything that’s wrong in the world.

I thought Alex’s statement was tongue in cheek.

There are radicalized, Israel/Israeli hating Muslims all over the world, some in Indonesia, I’m sure, who don’t even know where Israel is, geographically.

The recently publicized caper in the Bronx the plans of 4 guys turned in prison to destroy a synagogue, was, allegedly, in protest of “the war in Afghanistan”.

(unfortunately, it looks like there was some entrapment of that hapless crowd of would be bombers)

The July 2005 bombings in London were protest against “the war in Iraq”.

Hey, any old port (or any old excuse) in a storm. Israel, of course, being the most useful, while forming cells and the whole violence thing and the illusion of power and recognition that go with are just too attractive for bored, testosterone laden Useful Idiots in their 20’s.

But our President, as a function of having lived in Indonesia and having travelled to Pakistan in his younger days, said (again just last week) he has a special understanding of Muslims.

May 25, 2009 - 9:00 am 20. Joel:

Bravo!

May 25, 2009 - 9:00 am 21. D. Grant Chee:

Thanks James: Your 8:23am post is too accurate
for the libral mind. America is in grave danger due to liberal and ignorant immigration policy.
Every mosque and islamic foothold should be monitored and considered for removal from American soil. Our constitution guarantees freedom of religion! Protection of a hate ideology, such as islam, is not guaranteed. Our constitution is not a suicide pact with a’llah, moham, or the islamic messiah–or any invention.

May 25, 2009 - 9:04 am 22. HondaV65:

What amazes me about liberals today is how easily they jump to side of the Muslims – even the extreme Muslims – all while the absolutely revile fundamentalist Christians in the U.S. who basically keep to themselves.

They seem to totally miss the fact that their most precious constituencies and institutions would be evaporated overnight if the Islamo-fascists have their way and establish a world-wide caliphate.

Homosexuals will be immediately burned.

Atheists … will suffer the same fate.

Separation of Church and State – will be destroyed.

Women’s rights – destroyed.

Freedom of speech – destroyed.

Democracy – destroyed.

In essence – liberals favor that which will certainly destroy them.

May 25, 2009 - 9:11 am 23. fred:

#18, James,

You stole my thunder, and composed a fine response. Like you, and others posting here, I have read the Qur’an, some English translations of ahadith, and biographies of the life and deeds of Muhammad. He was a narcissistic personality disordered murderer, rapist, pedophile, liar, and scoundrel of the worst sort. In fact, he is one of history’s most evil men.

My experience with most Leftists (and even most Republicans) is that they have done none of the work we have done to investigate this matter. And this sloth goes right to the top: our political and academic elites have not read very much of the sources we have gone to in order to find the truth.

The West’s collectivists/statists share the same goal with Islam: the obliteration of liberty and the desire to control the masses completely. They brook no opposition. At least the jihadis are more open about their contempt for liberty. They tell us they mean to either kill us, force our conversion, or (for “people of the Book”)compel us to pay the jizya “with humiliation.” The Leftists are relying more on stealth to achieve their totalitarian aims. Both want to destroy Western Civilization and replace Judaeo-Christianity with something else. Both hate Jews and Israel, because the Jews are God’s manifestation and revelation to us that salvation must come through an actual people who keep a tradition alive. The Golden Rule comes from Judaism and Christianity.

Both the Marxists and the Muslims are encouraged to practice and are well-practiced with taqiyya: active deception. Both utterly lack the sense of sin. Both believe in and practice the hard version of “the end justifies the means.” The West is supposed to be more refined about that dictum. Overall, the real question is about what ends and what means. Most of the time morally incorrect means are wrong, regardless of the “ends.” But sometimes it really is the right thing to do: to deceive the enemy in order to protect innocent life. I would have had absolutely no qualms of conscience if I lied to Jew hunters in Europe during WWII in order to protect Jews and others being hunted down.

Lenin was said to have immediately grasped the value of using the Muslims inside the emerging Soviet Union to further the aims of the State. His was the first instance in modern times of the alliance of these two totalitarian ideologies.

Islam is a cult and a political ideology, not a religion.

May 25, 2009 - 9:21 am 24. D. Grant Chee:

Honda V65: Right! Great post–and an accurate
description of the fate that progressives
stupidly promote against the sane citizen.

May 25, 2009 - 9:23 am 25. David Thomson:

The leftist community is comprised of poorly read and overall intellectually immature individuals. They refuse to study the pertinent works on Islamic radicalism. Their phony excuse is that they are written by racists scum bags. Subscribing to political correct doctrines is very convenient for those inclined to be lazy. One of the reasons why so many are attracted by leftism is that they don’t want to do any hard work. The credentials they received from even our so-called best universities are often as fraudulent as a three dollar bill. Grade inflation is rampant. Their left-wing professors give them an A for mostly showing up for the class.

May 25, 2009 - 9:27 am 26. Oscar Wao:

“You’d be hard-pressed to find a left-leaning group of voters who know much about the contents of the Koran”

You could say the same thing about right wing nutlets and the bible. Unless, you care to explain how it has two different and mutually exclusive creation stories.

May 25, 2009 - 9:28 am 27. Oscar Wao:

What I find more interesting than the fact that most are Muslim, is the fact that they were ALL US client states. Every single one was a recipient of funding, and political intevention and manipulation during the cold war. EVERY SINGLE ONE was a US ally in the cold war. Every single one enjoyed a dictatorship propped up by the US. I know that you people find it hard to connect dots, and I realize that even checkers is beyond the grasp of most your skills of strategy and prescience. But still, it would be nice for the rest of us if you people THOUGHT about things longer than two minutes.

May 25, 2009 - 9:32 am 28. Delia:

History hasn’t been teaching us enough apparently.

Wheel or mouse-trap?

May 25, 2009 - 9:43 am 29. venividivici:

27:

Those facts may be of historical interest, but don’t really say anything much about current realities.

Also, the recipients of that funding were the very governments that the Islamic radicals oppose. I’m not all that worried about what a Mubarak might do in Egypt, but I worry about what a Muslim Brotherhood in power would do.

Maybe your problem is that you’re thinking for two minutes and the issues really require THREE minutes of thinking?

May 25, 2009 - 9:50 am 30. Terry Gain:

Morry Rotenberg:

Islam has been at war with the unbelievers since it’s founding in the 7th century. Violence in the past has not led to a lasting victory for them. They have discovered that democratic political correctness and western ideals of fairness plus the active uteri of their subjugated women will ultimately lead to victory in the modern era.

Truer words were never spoken. The only thing that has stopped Muslims is resistance and strength. It’s very discouraging therefore to see the U.S. military adopt the notion that Islam can be pacified by doing things like closing Gitmo.

They of course are now led by a know-nothing poseur who wanted to concede Iraq to al Qaeda and Iran and thus hand Islamists their biggest recruiting boon in centuries.

May 25, 2009 - 9:58 am 31. Terry Gain:

Oscar Wao Woo

Every single one enjoyed a dictatorship propped up by the US. I know that you people find it hard to connect dots, and I realize that even checkers is beyond the grasp of most your skills of strategy and prescience. But still, it would be nice for the rest of us if you people THOUGHT about things longer than two minutes.

You exhibit a rare combination of condescension and stupidity. You would have preferred that these Muslim dictatorships be propped up by what, the USSR?

You’re not suggesting that Muslims would have produced democracies but for this propping up, as you call it. Or are you?

Connect the dots! You don’t even recognize the dots.

May 25, 2009 - 10:06 am 32. Bohemond:

Oscar Wao:

Namecalling and insults: the first refuge of the leftist scoundrel.

May 25, 2009 - 10:14 am 33. John Smith:

26. Oscar Wao:

“You could say the same thing about right wing nutlets and the bible. Unless, you care to explain how it has two different and mutually exclusive creation stories.”

Hmmm..Oscar, I am only familiar with one creation story in the Bible (Adam and Eve) What is the other?

May 25, 2009 - 10:17 am 34. Oscar Wao:

“Truer words were never spoken.”

As far as this website goes, that’s for sure. This is all bullshit, all the time.

May 25, 2009 - 10:23 am 35. David Thomson:

“Every single one enjoyed a dictatorship propped up by the US.”

Islamic theological extremism long predates the very existence of the United States—and even Europe. Dominating non-Muslims and ultimately forcing them to “convert” is virtually inherent. We have zilch to do with the formation of their core values.

May 25, 2009 - 10:24 am 36. Oscar Wao:

Vendivicci.

You’ve actually elicited some sympathy from me, because you seem to at least be trying to think linearly. You said:

Also, the recipients of that funding were the very governments that the Islamic radicals oppose. I’m not all that worried about what a Mubarak might do in Egypt, but I worry about what a Muslim Brotherhood in power would do.

Do you understand what motivated the 13 colonies to insurrection? I’m not drawing a parallel here, but tyrrany ALWAYS produces a counterpart. Always. The salient fact is that the Muslim organizations are not a very good tool for that rebellion; but in those same countries, the US patiently spent a lot of time and money undermining democratic alternatives. Your point about Mubarak can’t be serious. Do you really expect the Egyptian people to do what is most convenient for you? Most Egyptians also do not want the brotherhood in power; but if its a question of the Brotherhood or Mubarak, they would choose the Brotherhood. Mubarak has been in power for 40 years, there is no due process in that country, there is no democracy in that country. It is a dictatorship; and sooner or later, it will explode.

Do yourself a favor and think about these things, and reflect in your life about the things that you see work in the microcosm. If you bully someone long enough, they’ll strike back one way or another, either to you, or more likely, someone weaker.

May 25, 2009 - 10:33 am 37. Pee Wee Herman, Community Organizer:

Looks like we have a real live College know-it-all hippy!

May 25, 2009 - 10:33 am 38. D. Grant Chee:

Those who follow the invented Q’uran are lost.
Islamics now seeking world domination will be utterly destroyed and their invented ideology of hate buried; permanently. On the short term the world will suffer the fate offered by islamic madness. Finally, in desperation, mankind will enter total war to destroy the deadly disease; formulated by the illiterate mo’ ham mad; the
murderer of Jews and all unbelievers in allahh.
Islam denies that Jesus Christ is Saviour of all who believe in Him.

May 25, 2009 - 11:05 am 39. Bohemond:

Keep it up, Wao. You’re almost a perfect stereotype of the leftist idiot, counterfactual “facts” and all.

So the US propped up Khomeinist Iran? Saddam’s Iraq? . Nasser’s Syro-Egyptian UAE? Ever notice whose T-62’s and AK-47s the Arab world was armed with?

But in the topsy-turvy looking-glass world you, Wao, and the blame-America brigade inhabit, somehow, of course, it’s always *our* fault. I’m sure in the Forties you’d have been finding a way to blame us for Pearl Harbor and Auschwitz.

Militant jihadism is evil, an evil we did not create. Yes, Wao, there exists evil which does not stem from Americans: and its growth is fostered by morally purblind fools who think your throats will be spared simply because you hate America as much as the Islamist savages do.

May 25, 2009 - 11:51 am 40. Steve:

I think this paradox of the lack of liberal outrage over the crimes of radical Islam can partly be explained by the way the liberal mind works.

I have brought up with liberals the fact that homosexuals tend to be killed in Islamic countries, they respond that “gay marriage” isn’t legal here (in most places).

I have pointed out to them that anyone who speaks as an atheist in a place like Iran would be thrown in prison. They start whining about fundamentalist Christianity here.

I have told them that the radical Islamic definition of torture is cutting off people’s heads, dragging them behind cars, using a blowtorch on their backs, or electrocuting them. They respond by whining over 3 detainees who essentially had a bucket of water poured in their faces.

Liberals seem to live in a binary world. They are absolutely unable to distinguish between matters of degree. The most horrible forms of death are equated with shivering in the cold or a loss of sleep. You are either with them or against them. No wonder Lenin famously said that liberals are useful idiots.

May 25, 2009 - 12:05 pm 41. El hefe:

It is estimated that 10-15% of all Muslims are radicalized (acting upon their beliefs). There are estimated 1.5 billion Muslims in the world which means a minimum of 150 million potential radical killers are out there waiting for the chance to kill a Christian, Jew or other infidel. In the USA there are 3 million Muslims, mostly immigrant. If you are from the USA you are from a Christian nation so you are infidel.
Muslims know their own history well and they know who their enemies are, Christians and Jews, the people of the book. This is the reason: While Islam believes Jesus existed and was a prophet they do not believe He is the Son of God. The Christian bible says “Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son.” This makes Islam the Anti Christ religion. The spirit of antichrist has been in the earth since the days of the apostle John but Islam is the only great antichrist religion saying ‘God forbid that he should have a son’ proclaiming it is beneath God to have a mortal son. This information is not new, our forefathers were well aware of the great Anti Christ religion. Why? The reason is there was a first worldwide jihad.
We are in the midst of the second jihad; the first was stopped at the gates of Vienna and the battle of Tours. Where will the second jihad be stopped? It will be stopped and forever this time as described in the book of Revelation. Islam is the beast.
Another great satanic deception is taking place in some mainstream Christian churches. The idea put forth in these churches is; the antichrist is yet to come, we are waiting for the great tribulation, the mark of the beast and the rapture. These ideas are utter foolishness, if one could ask the myriad of Christians and Jews who have been slaughtered since AD 70 whether or not they were in the great tribulation, what would they say? The big problem is the ignorance of the history of the last 2000 years that permeates our society. There is no need to wonder why so many are clueless as to what is really happening in our world. Most people are simply blinded to the reality and the truth history reveals. This deception is why most are asleep.
We are at war with the true believers of Islam and so far they are winning because most are not aware of what is happening in their midst.

May 25, 2009 - 12:21 pm 42. Oscar Wao:

Bohemond.

“So the US propped up Khomeinist Iran? Saddam’s Iraq? . Nasser’s Syro-Egyptian UAE? Ever notice whose T-62’s and AK-47s the Arab world was armed with?”

You’ve asked some very stupid questions.

May 25, 2009 - 12:34 pm 43. David Thomson:

“….the US patiently spent a lot of time and money undermining democratic alternatives.”

You are discussing a part of the world that had no democratic traditions. Democracy was an alien concept bewildering the vast majority of its inhabitants especially some 45-65 years ago. Americans were mostly free long before the revolution of 1776. Our breakaway from Great Britain was merely the culmination of a long evolved process started over 100 years earlier. Moreover, George III while not exactly an elected leader—was more of a benevolent and meddlesome father figure than a vicious tyrant. The leaders of our revolution were also well educated and able to debate long into the evening the works of John Locke and Charles de Secondat Montesquieu.

May 25, 2009 - 12:54 pm 44. D. Grant Chee:

El hefe: Thanks for your post above.

May 25, 2009 - 12:54 pm 45. Oscar Wao:

David Thompson

I found your post very funny, thanks”

You are discussing a part of the world that had no democratic traditions. Democracy was an alien concept bewildering the vast majority of its inhabitants especially some 45-65 years ago. Americans were mostly free long before the revolution of 1776. Our breakaway from Great Britain was merely the culmination of a long evolved process started over 100 years earlier. Moreover, George III while not exactly an elected leader—was more of a benevolent and meddlesome father figure than a vicious tyrant.

I have to admit I must stand back and admire how completely immune to logic your argument is. My favorite part is when you explain how even the non-democratic monarchical tradition of the West was democratic. Really. My compliments, even an 11 year old wouldn’t have been able to pull that off.

May 25, 2009 - 1:06 pm 46. David Thomson:

“My favorite part is when you explain how even the non-democratic monarchical tradition of the West was democratic.”

George III was substantially checked and balanced by parliament at the time of the American Revolution. He admittedly could not be voted out of office—but the king could also not behave like a benevolent dictator. The American colonists of 1776 were roughly 80% independent of the homeland. We should never forget that the founding fathers finally declared complete independence over the proposed taxes on stamps and tea. These issues pale in comparison to the challenges faced by the citizens living in the Middle East.

May 25, 2009 - 1:38 pm 47. logdon:

There was a leading Muslim cleric (who’s name now escapes me, be who held the title of “Mufti”) who was a great friend to Hitler and gave weekly radio broadcasts from Germany inciting Muslims everywhere to join the facist cause and “kill Jews everywhere”.

The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Grand Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini. He travelled to Berlin, met like minded Jew hating obsessive, Adolph Hitler. Also implicit in formation and running of the Serbian Muslim SS Handschar Division.

And Muslims have the gall to call Israel a Nazi State.

May 25, 2009 - 1:43 pm 48. Oscar Wao:

“He admittedly could not be voted out of office—but the king could also not behave like a benevolent dictator. The American colonists of 1776 were roughly 80% independent of the homeland.”

Brilliant reasoning. Didn’t those colonists have to have a war to defend their rights?

May 25, 2009 - 2:19 pm 49. Wolla Dalbo:

#23 Fred—“our political and academic elites have not read very much of the sources we have gone to in order to find the truth.”

As for our academic elites, I would argue, rather, that after being on the receiving end of the more than $200 million dollars researchers know of (see http://www.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=13551 and http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/5046)—and probably a lot more—in Saudi money since the mid 1970s; money donated–with strings attached giving the Saudis more and more influence and control over Middle Eastern Studies and hiring, curriculum, publication, speaking invitations, awards, tenure and academic organizations–to dozens of our most prestigious and influential universities to support existing Middle Eastern departments, chairs, scholars and programs, to establish new study centers, departments, programs and chairs, and to set up scholarships—they know exactly what line (the Saudi Wahabi line) they need to follow if they want that money and their book contracts, promotions and tenure to arrive right on time.

The more objective, traditional “Orientalist” school, that was the culmination of several hundred years of study and observation of Islam, was pretty much destroyed by the Left, Postmodernism and Edward Said and his book “Orientalism,” as they swept through Academia from the 1970s onward, and those academics who are suspected of just a hint of Orientalist taint just don’t get hired or published or get tenure in academia today, many have been silenced and have switched to less dangerous areas of research for fear of Muslim violence, any archeological excavations in the Arabian Peninsula that might have turned up “inconvenient” results have been shut down or not initiated, and the few scholars still working in the field on what have now become “controversial” subjects–like the origins of Islam and very early Muslim history, the Life of Muhammad, and the origin and content of the Qur’an—like “Christoph Luxenberg,” have to publish under pseudonyms, so that some Jihadi doesn’t stroll into their house one day and kill them and their families.

So, it isn’t the ignorance of our academics so much as it is their fear and their hopes for advantage that results in the kind of counter intuitive, pro-Muslim, anti-Western narrative that contemporary “scholars” lay out for the public.

May 25, 2009 - 2:43 pm 50. David Thomson:

“Didn’t those colonists have to have a war to defend their rights?”

Only for the last 20%. The stamp act was a minor irritant and the tea was sold by a protected supplier of the Crown. The added cost, if any, was minimal. It was the principle that mattered. And had the colonists not revolted—they would have still been a lot freer than the typical citizen living in the Middle East.

There are also many scholars who argue that things were getting better in France before the revolution occurred. The people simply were no longer patient to wait for further change. You would have also surely preferred to live in pre-revolutionary France than a Middle Eastern country—especially if you were a woman.

May 25, 2009 - 2:46 pm 51. myth buster:

Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 do not contradict each other. Genesis 1 speaks of the creation of the universe and the planet, while Genesis 2 zooms in on the Garden of Eden. Contrary to popular belief, the Garden of Eden did not cover the entire planet, but was rather a “starter garden” that Adam was charged with maintaining and expanding, located in what is now Iraq.

May 25, 2009 - 3:02 pm 52. venividivici:

The salient fact is that the Muslim organizations are not a very good tool for that rebellion; but in those same countries, the US patiently spent a lot of time and money undermining democratic alternatives.

If you mean the local branches of the international Communist movements, yes, there was a lot of time and money spent undermining them, and rightly so. If the local democratic movements had been agitating for something like constitutional republicanism or even social democracy, I doubt the US would have been opposed. That they were agitating for the most heinous form of governance ever to emerge from Western philosophical traditions made it right to oppose them.

Your point about Mubarak can’t be serious. Do you really expect the Egyptian people to do what is most convenient for you? Most Egyptians also do not want the brotherhood in power; but if its a question of the Brotherhood or Mubarak, they would choose the Brotherhood. Mubarak has been in power for 40 years, there is no due process in that country, there is no democracy in that country. It is a dictatorship; and sooner or later, it will explode.

My point wasn’t that Mubarak will pursue objectives that are completely in line with what I would prefer, only that, as a venal criminal, he is not going to pursue more radical forms of action, which the Muslim Brotherhood would find congenial to their aims.

Why is it that Middle Eastern opposition movements always fall back on radical Islam to express their goals? It’s not as if the foundational texts of the aforementioned constitutional republicanism and social democracy aren’t available, so why not aver themselves of them in describing their aspirations and govern in accordance with them once in power (e.g. Hamas)?

Part of the problem is that we in the West allow them to continue to exist under the delusion that Islam is some sort of equal to those much more progressive ideologies and the other part of the problem is that they’ve mentally boxed themselves in via the syllogism:

Islam is perfect
Secular governments are not Islamic
Secular governments must be replaced by Islamic governments

May 25, 2009 - 3:07 pm 53. Anonymous:

“My favorite part is when you explain how even the non-democratic monarchical tradition of the West was democratic. Really. My compliments, even an 11 year old wouldn’t have been able to pull that off.”

Are you claiming that American political thought bore no debt to England, or that England did not have an elected Parliament at the time of the Revolutionary War? If so, then most 11 year olds have more historical knowledge than you do. Your junior high school sarcasm only further proves what an immature ignoramus you are.

Here is a link to the above, straight from the “horse’s mouth”, so to speak:

http://www.parliament.uk/about/history/institution.cfm

Note especailly this statement: “The Bill of Rights was agreed in 1689. This established Parliament’s authority over the monarch: Parliament would be responsible for passing or repealing all laws.”

May 25, 2009 - 3:38 pm 54. fred:

Notice the odious presence of a certain collectivist on this thread reflexively defending Islam? They just can’t help themselves. It is to that degree that they so hate our Judaeo-Christian-Romano-Graeco civilization. They despise it. This is why they run cover for the muscular, truculent jihadis.

Wolla Dalbo @49,

Yes, I am quite aware of the background you so well described. All of the major, scholarly critics of Islam now reside outside of academia, like Robert Spencer (I’ve always wondered if that was his REAL name, since he’s told us that his family is Christian and escaped from Turkey some years ago. “Spencer” is not a Turkish/Armenian name). Apparently, he takes great precautions about where he lives as well as information about himself. He takes security precautions.

So, political and academic elites are whores and cowards. Like John Esposito of Georgetown. I’m an ex-Jesuit and I have lost a lot of respect for the Society of Jesus because they keep that lying whore at Georgetown U. I met Prof. Esposito, btw, many years ago when he was at the College of the Holy Cross in Worcester, MA. I was not impressed with him. He’s clever, cunning, and I think very much attuned to where his bread is buttered. A total coward, however. Also a Sixties radical.

May 25, 2009 - 4:09 pm 55. Elias Davidsson:

Apparently the author of the above article forgets who attacks whom. According to media reports no Islamic country has attacked the United States or European countries. It is the other way round.

It is not Palestinians who occupy Tel Aviv and Haifa. It is Israeli Jews who occupy Palestinian cities and oppress their inhabitants.

The Western world should not feel too arrogant towards Islamic countries. The worst calamities in contemporary history were committed by Germany (the Nazi regime), the Soviet Union (under Stalin) and the United States (Hiroshima, Nagasaky, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia and elsewhere), not to speak of the reckless disregard of justice prevailing within Western-controlled institutions such as the IMF and the WTO.

To those who will wish to respond by pointing out Islamic terrorism, I will simply say: Before making such claims, check the evidence and the statistics. You’ll discover that most terrorist acts in the West are NOT committed by Muslims.

While Muslims are no angels and violent conflicts have taken place within Muslim countries, we who live in the West must at least display humility and recognize our own violent history against the third world and particularly against Muslim nations and amend our ways before lecturing others.

May 25, 2009 - 4:29 pm 56. Clayton E. Cramer:

“Every single one was a recipient of funding, and political intevention and manipulation during the cold war. EVERY SINGLE ONE was a US ally in the cold war.”

This is completely false. While the U.S. did back some Muslim governments (the Shah of Iran, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Jordan), there were quite a number of Muslim countries allied with the Soviet Union (Libya, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Iran after the fall of the Shah), or which were members of the nonaligned but anti-American movement, such as Algeria and Tunisia. We made some efforts to lure Iraq’s government over to your side after the Shah fell, but we were not successful. Hussein remained a client state of the Soviet Union until it fell.

This Oscar Wao is a remarkably ignorant person.

May 25, 2009 - 4:49 pm 57. Greg:

I think the Left and practicing Muslims are in the same camp because they both want America as it is now destroyed. Obama is dismantling our military, our defense, and our security systematically already; he’s wasting no time. He will not be a supporter of Israel any differently than Carter was/is. The Left and ultra-liberals see Islamists as allies. Obama trips over himself trying to please the Muslim world with his silver tongue, even finding it necessary to tell a Muslim audience in an Islamic country that “America is not a Christian country.” What was his purpose in saying that? He wasn’t answering a question; he wasn’t speaking about religion or American history – he just felt it necessary to drive a point home that we are not Christian. That was music to their ears, and the Lefts’ also.

May 25, 2009 - 5:05 pm 58. venividivici:

55:

To those who will wish to respond by pointing out Islamic terrorism, I will simply say: Before making such claims, check the evidence and the statistics. You’ll discover that most terrorist acts in the West are NOT committed by Muslims.

Good, now let’s not give them the chance to up those numbers, which all evidence of Muslim activities around the globe say they will.

Your point is like placing a bull into a china shop and saying after a few milliseconds, “See nothing wrong with having a bull in a china shop”.

According to media reports no Islamic country has attacked the United States or European countries.

That’s because the leaders of those countries use proxies to attack American and European interests outside of the American and European homelands, generally, e.g. companies, embassies, assassinations of emissaries, etc. So while your statement might be technically correct, you ignore a large range of activities.

The Western world should not feel too arrogant towards Islamic countries. The worst calamities in contemporary history were committed by Germany (the Nazi regime), the Soviet Union (under Stalin) and the United States (Hiroshima, Nagasaky, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia and elsewhere), not to speak of the reckless disregard of justice prevailing within Western-controlled institutions such as the IMF and the WTO.

Reading the history of Islamic jihad in the Middle East and the subcontinent, one would have to be naive in the extreme to believe that the main factor lacking for Muslims to have bested any Western atrocities was capability, not intention.

May 25, 2009 - 5:10 pm 59. Oscar Wao:

Are you claiming that American political thought bore no debt to England, or that England did not have an elected Parliament at the time of the Revolutionary War?

Can you read? I don’t see any of those words in any of the comments I posted. Listen, I don’t want to get in the way of you having a debate with yourself. Let me know when you’re finished; I’m sure you’ll be victorious.

If you’re trying to imply that the American colonies–or India, for that matter–were represented by British parliament, then you’re going to be up all night looking for those links. Maybe that is the debt of democracy that the US owes to Britain, for we’ve institutionalized that same system in two countries now, Iraq and Afghanistan, which are run by the US, despite what their leadership has to say about it. I assume that the US is much better at representing the interests of those countries in its executive and legislature than the Monarchy and legislature of Britain were in terms of the US.

Just take a look at this:

“Zalmay Khalilzad, who was President George W. Bush’s ambassador to Afghanistan, could assume a powerful, unelected position inside the Afghan government under a plan he is discussing with Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, according to senior American and Afghan officials.

Mr. Khalilzad, an American citizen who was born in Afghanistan, had considered challenging Mr. Karzai for the presidency in elections scheduled for this summer.

But Mr. Khalilzad missed the May 8 filing deadline, and the American and Afghan officials say that he has been talking with Mr. Karzai for several weeks about taking on a job that the two have described as the chief executive officer of Afghanistan.

…some Afghanistan experts said that enlisting Mr. Khalilzad would have the virtue of bringing a strong, competent leader into an increasingly dysfunctional Afghan government.

The position would allow Mr. Khalilzad to serve as “a prime minister, except not prime minister because he wouldn’t be responsible to a parliamentary system,” a senior Obama administration official said. Taking the unelected position would also allow Mr. Khalilzad to keep his American citizenship.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/19/world/asia/19diplo.html

Yes, you’re right, there’s quite a bit of the British colonial model in our own democracy.

May 25, 2009 - 5:41 pm 60. Sgt. Hulka:

Clayton Cramer. Before you go throwing around the term ignorant, you should read the link in the article, Forbes “World’s Most Dangerous Countries” which Steinberg bases his current assessment of the Islamic world. The countries listed there are:

Somalia: former US client state

Afghanistan: previous Soviet backed government overthrown by US client organization funded by the US during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Popularly known as the Taliban

Iraq: Well, we all know about the picture of Rumsfeld shaking hands with Hussein, and the enormous amount of subsidies and weapons we gave the country in the eighties. I mean, that is some people know.

These three, the Forbes article says “…are clearly in a league of their own.”

The remainder:

The Democratic Republic of Congo: Not a muslim state at all, I suggest you let the writer of the article above know it. HOwever, a very long-lived client state of ours until the death of Mobutu.

Sudan: Snug relations due to oil reserves until word of the atrocities got out.

Pakistan: Still a very close friend, receiving billions a year of your tea-bagging dollars.

In fact, the only countries on that list that weren’t US client states are Yemen and Algeria, though Yemen has cozy relations with the US today.

Also, this paragraph from the article linked to by Steinberg is a perfect example of how wrong you people get almost everything. So many idiots went on and on complaining about the long tradition of Islam in producing tyrrany etcetera, and Steinberg brings up the Forbes list so that he can gloat

Forbes’ 2009 survey of the world’s most dangerous countries is out, and the list is comprised almost entirely of Islamic-dominated lands.

But the Forbe’s article makes it very clear the salient connection that all of these countries have:

In fact, even though the 15 most dangerous countries span four continents, they all share one trait: They were once European colonies.

Much of the blame for today’s failed states can be laid at the hands of colonial meddlers who carved up faraway lands long ago, lumping bitter rivals together in arbitrarily defined states. The British were the worst offenders of all, with an imperial presence in four of today’s five most dangerous countries.

Duh.

May 25, 2009 - 6:14 pm 61. Fantom:

“35. David Thomson:
“Every single one enjoyed a dictatorship propped up by the US.”

Islamic theological extremism long predates the very existence of the United States—and even Europe. Dominating non-Muslims and ultimately forcing them to “convert” is virtually inherent. We have zilch to do with the formation of their core values.”

Of course, just as global climate change predated the SUV. But do not expect a liberal to grasp that concept.

May 25, 2009 - 6:16 pm 62. Anonymous:

To avoid the raging comment arguments, and return to the thesis of the post, I can offer this.

Having sat through all of the pabulum required to earn an M.A. in Bilingual/Multicultural Education, I can tell you emphatically that modern multicultural education, which is much loved by Liberals, is actually feelgood rationalization for ignorance and self-absorption. After all, why bother learning about other cultures if you’ve told yourself they don’t have substantive differences? That saves one a great deal of hard reading and hard thought. Just go on your merry way, trying to ignore reality and difficult moral judgments while calling yourself virtuous for it.

Modern multiculturalists are usually thoroughly ignorant of other cultures. Even when they are not, they are condecending, and treat other cultures as either charmingly quaint, or intractably primitive. Either way, they always manage to avoid any hard questions about the world and the way it is, and what we can or should do about it.

May 25, 2009 - 6:58 pm 63. fred:

If the West – and by that term I mean the modern, industrialized world that has, as its foundation, the unique and liberating amalgam of Judaeo-Christian-Romano-Graeco contributions – does not awake from this maddening attempt at imitating the ostrich, it will find itself gradually absorbed into or profoundly influenced by the Ummah (dar al Islam). Islam is a far more robust ideology than Communism/Marxism, because central to it is the intoxicating elixir of the promise of eternal reward to those who fight for Allah and die in the jihad. Marxism provides no such promises. That is why during wars in which socialist armies are at work, political officers have to be embedded in the units to point pistols and machine guns at the backs of the “comrades” to stiffen their resolve to die for the cause. No such threats are needed for the warriors of Allah. Marxists are, at heart, cowards. The jihadis, however misguided and bloodthirsty, show more bravery. Hence, it makes Islam more durable.

In fact, if Marxism and Islam should devour the free world, my bet is on the Muslims eliminating the Marxists. And quite efficiently, I might add. I knew many Iranian Communists who had to flee Iran after Khomeini came to power. They felt betrayed by him, since their help in overthrowing the Shah was indispensable (but so was Jimmy Carter’s help also!).

May 25, 2009 - 8:09 pm 64. Mabel Stofales:

Anonymous: “Having sat through all of the pabulum required to earn an M.A. in Bilingual/Multicultural Education”

Why should anybody listen to someone stupid enough to get an MA in something he can’t stand? Talk about stupid.

May 25, 2009 - 8:21 pm 65. venividivici:

So many idiots went on and on complaining about the long tradition of Islam in producing tyrrany etcetera, and Steinberg brings up the Forbes list so that he can gloat

Much of the blame for today’s failed states can be laid at the hands of colonial meddlers who carved up faraway lands long ago, lumping bitter rivals together in arbitrarily defined states. The British were the worst offenders of all, with an imperial presence in four of today’s five most dangerous countries.

Oh, jeez, are we really going to have to hear about “post-colonialism” for another generation? BORING! Isn’t there a statute of limitations on that excuse? Are these people ever going to be considered responsible for their own choices and lives? I don’t recall any Americans complaining that they were once a British colony after the Revolutionary War ended. Get on with life, already.

Also, if you could show me the periods of Islamic history where tyranny or near-tyranny wasn’t the norm, it might give you’re use of the term “idiot” to describe those pointing out Islam’s long tradition in these matters some credibility.

Read Muslim histories. They themselves do not deny that their regimes were tyrannical, only that the tyrant’s actions were in accordance with Islam. So long as you follow Islam’s “rules”, you are OK, even though those rules do amount to tyranny by nearly any period in Western history’s standards.

May 25, 2009 - 8:24 pm 66. Jason:

Good news everybody!! Our boys have done such an outstanding job overseas that Iraq is on pace in May for the lowest death toll of Iraqi forces and civilians for any month so far. Only the best fighting force in the world could have accomplished this. We are upholding our promise to the Iraqi people despite all the naysayers and irresponsible people who would have left them for slaughter. God bless our troops and lets continue to give them whatever they need so that they can come home as quickly as possible. I just wanted to pass along some good news on this somber day that you might not see on the news.

http://icasualties.org/Iraq/index.aspx
(scroll down, you’ll see it)

May 25, 2009 - 9:13 pm 67. D. Grant Chee:

Islamic terrorist’s have declared war on Israel,
America and all non muslims. The discussion is
actually complete. Our goal is to destroy, utterly, that invention of hate that seeks our destruction, submission and enslavement. You are either for us or against us?

May 25, 2009 - 9:20 pm 68. Larsen E. Whipsnade:

55. Elias Davidsson: “Apparently the author of the above article forgets who attacks whom. . . It is not Palestinians who occupy Tel Aviv and Haifa. It is Israeli Jews who occupy Palestinian cities and oppress their inhabitants.”

For the unpteenth time, there is no country called “Palestine”, nor has such a country ever existed. The cities around Israel are in a no-man’s land, free to be occupied by Jordan or Egypt or Syria. The disorganized rabble who live there are fond of declaring that there is no such country as Israel, either. However, possession and occupation is still 9/10ths of the law. That’s how real countries are created. So far, Israel is on top in this wrestling match. But the losers keep insisting that they have the right to win, & nobody else will ever be allowed to win.

May 25, 2009 - 9:25 pm 69. Clay Marley:

“You’d be hard-pressed to find a left-leaning group of voters who know much about the contents of the Koran.”

You’d also have trouble finding a right-leaning group of voters who know anything about the Koran. It was Bush that kept saying it was a tiny minority of extremists who “hijacked” the religion. It was Bush who invaded Iraq with the goal of creating a stable democracy. Laughable really, for those who have read and studied the Koran.

Remember those “Visualize world peace” bumper stickers? It will never happen as long as Islam exists.

May 25, 2009 - 9:28 pm 70. Oscar Wao:

Venidveddivicci

Don’t blame me. David Steinberg, the author of this piece is the one who linked to that article. Here it is again, in case you didn’t get it the first time.

Forbes’ 2009 survey of the world’s most dangerous countries is out, and the list is comprised almost entirely of Islamic-dominated lands. A second list, of the world’s active conflicts, is essentially a checklist of current Islamic aggression (and describes an entirely related point — the few non-Islamic conflicts have communist/socialist or other totalitarian participants). Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Congo, Pakistan, West Bank/Gaza Strip, Sri Lanka, Yemen, Sudan, Zimbabwe, Ivory Coast, Haiti, Algeria, Nigeria, Georgia — that’s Forbes‘ top 15.

Go and check it out yourself. Toward the bottom of the article.

http://www.forbes.com/2009/03/04/most-dangerous-countries-lifestyle-travel_dangerous_countries.html

That Steinberg’s obviously a pro-Jihadist.

May 25, 2009 - 9:44 pm 71. Peggy:

For the moderates who believe in Islam, Islam is whatever they decide it is. The real Islam is exactly equal to whatever nice decent folks do. Any one who doesn’t act nice is not practicing real Islam. I honestly believe that most of these people have no idea what is in the actual teachings as well. They were born into the religion. They have been told since birth that it is the sum of all virtues and that all those who believe in it are righteous people and that is as far as they ever look into it. Its human nature. I think there are a lot of Christians like that too. The only difference is that when Christians really study Christianity, they find a simple and demanding message that goes way beyond “nice” and demands nothing less than sacrificial love. The Muslim who goes beyond cultural assumptions about their religion will either find the real religion of Mohammed and become extremists of one form or another, or else they will have to accept an elaborate system of rationalization which must re-interpret, ignore or deny vast portions of the record in order to arrive at a made up religion which is perfectly peaceful, modern and virtuous.

May 25, 2009 - 9:46 pm 72. Mike Reynolds:

The Sri Lanka conflict is not Islamist. It’s Hindu vs Buddhist. You should probably make that correction.
Other than that, you are pretty accurate.

May 25, 2009 - 9:52 pm 73. The Infidel Alliance:

We are beginning to understand that exposing the truth about Islam’s barbarity is the way to defeat Islam, rather than drinking the kool-aid mantra of “Islam is a religion of peace” and genuflecting to Islamic kings.

While exposing the bloody, intolerant history of the 1,400 year ISLAMIC WORLD WAR is critical, the most effective tool in defanging and defeating Islam is to expose the truth about its “prophet”, Muhammed.

Far from being “al-insan al-kamil” (the perfect man), or “an excellent model of conduct” (Koran 33:21), Muhammed was simply a successful Charles Manson.

Muhammed was a sadistic sociopath, a murderer, a slaver, a decapitator, a mutilator, an amputator, a thief, a looter, a liar, a misogynist, a sexual deviant, a paedophile, a genocidist, motivated by personal greed, lust and power. He was the prototypical Muslim terrorist.

His examples represent the worst of human potential. He was quite possibly one of the most vile men in the pantheon of human history.

This assessment of Muhammed is not some wacky opinion from some ignorant Islamophobe. These are FACTS that can be found recorded in the Islamic “holy” texts.

As we have all seen, critical comments about Muhammed can be serious business – riots, torched cars, burned buildings, death, destruction, death fatwas – but it’s something we must do.

This kind of behavior can also be seen in a cornered animal. With no way out, they resort to extreme violence. To ask a Muslim to objectively defend the actions of Muhammed is to ask them to defend the indefensible, thus cornered they resort to extreme violence.

I urge everyone to learn about the life of Muhammed from Islamic source texts. Learn about his thievery, his decapitations, his brutal amputations, his murder, his abuse, his sex life with a little 9 year old girl.

Then ask the friendly Muslim next door to defend these actions as the proper examples of a civilized man. Ask if they are examples to be emulated. Ask them to defend the indefensible.

Over time, the lies that support Islam (”Islam is a Religion of Peace” and “Muhammed was a holy man, a role model”) will collapse, and Islam itself will collapse.

~ The Infidel Alliance

May 25, 2009 - 9:59 pm 74. Rashputin:

Just reinstate the Ottoman Empire, problem solved. Not only would it reduce the number of Muslim countries issuing passports, it would also give the Persians a severe case of chronic pants crapping.

Yup, Constantinople/Istanbul is built on seven hills just like Rome, so it’s the perfect place to be the center of a Muslim Empire just like Rome was once the center of a Christian Empire.

See, when you take the “progressive” approch to things and just turn the clock back a hundred years everything works out fine. Energy production, Industry, medicine, international releations, anything and everything can be improved by just going backwards.

Regards

May 25, 2009 - 11:13 pm 75. "progressive"watch:

Tamstaafl,the President has a special understanding of everything. Where I come from we call people with his kind of special understanding a dumbass,but I think that in other circles they are called Marxists.

May 25, 2009 - 11:49 pm 76. Scwharzkopf's Ghost:

Has anyone seen Bilgeman? He still has my bandana.

May 26, 2009 - 12:28 am 77. Walter:

The civil war in Sri Lanka is not Islamist. The Tamil Tigers are Hindus, while the Sinhalese are Buddhists. I suggest scratching that one off the list.

May 26, 2009 - 1:08 am 78. Hesperado:

Steinberg writes:

“Almost eight years following 9/11, eight years to address these questions, and I am hard-pressed to find any sort of sizable leftist group of voters who know a bloody thing about the contents of the Koran.”

It’s not just Leftists and some classical liberals who remain stubbornly clueless about Islam — it is virtually everyone throughout the West, Left, Right and Center.

Only a very tiny minority has become intelligent enough to be critical of Islam itself (and not some euphemistic truncation like “Islamism” or “radical Islam” or “Wahhabism” or “Salafism” etc.), and while this tiny minority may be represented more by conservatives than liberals, the remaining majority of conservatives throughout the West are pretty much just as beholden to PC MC (politically correct multi-culturalism) as the Left is when it comes to Islam and to Muslims.

If our problem were only Leftists and a few classical liberals, the West would demonstrate far more rationality than it currently is in the face of the global revival of Islamic supremacism and in the ugly fanaticism that Muslims all over the world display in a myriad ways.

The larger problem is that PC MC has become dominant and mainstream throughout the West over the past 50-odd years — and PC MC is not merely Leftist, since again, the majority of Conservatives and Centrists swallow and regurgitate its principles with regard to Islam and Muslims. I have analyzed PC MC on my blog in at least 50 essays. I can boil down my analysis to one thing: the #1 axiom of PC MC is Reverse Racism, by which the West is routinely denigrated and apologized for, while the non-West — aka, the Muslims — are routinely exonerated, whitewashed, protected, and “respected” no matter what grotesquely anti-liberal anti-human things they say and do.

May 26, 2009 - 1:52 am 79. RRWest:

The only thing that the world has gained from Islam during its reign of terror are three things:

1 Beautiful architecture. Check out Shah Jahans tomb for his wife known as the Taj Mahal for an example.

2 The word “assassin” from the Arabic term for hashish eater and all that assassins do (though the idea of organized groups of political killers was not generally known in the west until that time)

3 The word “terrorist” which was coined after the 1972 attack by the PLO against the Israeli athletes at the Olympic Games in Munich in 1972.

Thats quite a short and blood-tinged legacy if you ask me.

May the west prevail.
Kaffir and proud.

May 26, 2009 - 6:18 am 80. Lori Lowenthal Marcus:

Who is David Steinberg and why isn’t he out front in our fight against the current assinine view of Islamism? I see the little bio at the bottom of his magnificent piece, but REALLY, who is he? Where is he? I want more!

May 26, 2009 - 7:01 am 81. Wolla Dalbo:

RRWest–the part they never tell you.

From what I have read, after Muslim ruler Shah Jahan’s Taj Mahal was finished, he ordered the hands cut off of the 20,000 Hindu slaves who built the Taj–some sources say he also ordered that all the designers be killed too–so that no one could build a building to compete with it in beauty.

May 26, 2009 - 7:24 am 82. The Infidel Alliance:

Dear #79 RRWest,

You state “The word “terrorist” …was coined after the 1972 attack by the PLO against the Israeli athletes at the Olympic Games in Munich in 1972.

Actually, it could be argued that the word “terrorist” was coined in the 7th century, when Muhammed, Islam’s sadistic sociopathic, murdering, raping, looting, beheading, mutilating, slaving, genocidist “prophet” proudly proclaimed:

“I have been made victorious with terror” Bukhari (52:220)

Muhammed was the self admitted prototypical Islamic terrorist.

~ The Infidel Alliance

May 26, 2009 - 8:03 am 83. Scwharzkopf's Ghost:

Actually, the term terrorist goes back to a 19th century anti-monarchy group in Russia. Sorry, I looked that up; I know the rules about actually looking stuff up and knowing, and how fancy-pants that looks.

May 26, 2009 - 8:32 am 84. David S:

I guess algebra ain’t worth squat.

I don’t think the problem here is with left-wing voters not understanding the Koran. There is clearly a broad spectrum of belief and practice within all Abrahamic religions, and there are Jews and Christians just as willing to be martyred as the jihadis that get so much press these days. It’s not a problem specific to the Koran.

The article cited makes it pretty clear that the British did a piss-poor job handing these colonies back to the native people, and exacerbated a lot of conflicts that could have been better addressed.

Withholding judgement is a good thing, when practiced in moderation. Jumping to conclusions is almost never a good thing, particularly when it involves going to war and expending thousands of lives and trillions of dollars.

As Gandhi said “I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” If what you claim is true about the Koran, Moslems and Mohammed, then the jihadis are less hypocritical than their oppressors. A religious war is the worst kind of conflict, and this continual drumbeat of anti-moslem rhetoric is not productive.

Peace.

DS

May 26, 2009 - 10:24 am 85. JED:

To be a candidate to convert to Islam one must be prepared to surrender. That about sums the movement for those with ambiguous core values. Add to that long list the nihilists, lifestle decadents, apologists, and the cheese-eating surrender monkeys.

May 26, 2009 - 10:58 am 86. Frank:

Oscar Wao:

Is the perfect example of the anti-intellectual, group think, leftist talking point parroting idiot who helps to prove everything this article says about the left.

May 26, 2009 - 11:09 am 87. Rich Rostrom:

Mr. Steinberg destroys his credibility when he writes of “an Islamist civil war in Sri Lanka.” The Sri Lankan conflict was an insurgency by Tamil-speaking Hindus against the Sinhalese Buddhist majority. This is extremely well-known. There are Moslems in Sri Lanka (8% of the population), but they were mere bystanders in this war. He also ignores the bloodiest war in the entire world: the civil war in Congo, with 3M dead so far.

However, he has a strong point about the intrinsic violence of Islam. The question then is “What is to be done?” To say that “Islam means peace” is a form of denial. But to say that “Islam is at war with the world” is to say that the jihadists correctly interpret Islam – which means that all devout Moslems should join them.

At this time, the great majority of Moslems are not jihadis. A small percent are jihadis (this is still hundreds of thousands). A substantial minority are passive supporters of jihadism. About half are indifferent or mildly sympathetic or hostile. A smaller minority are anti-jihadist for various reasons. This latter group includes the governments of some Moslem countries, who have cooperated substantially with the U.S. (e.g. the many al-Qaeda figures captured in Pakistan).

To declare that Islam itself is the problem would be to make enemies of all these people, and initiate a conflict vastly greater than the present one. Who would want that? It would also violate the long-standing principle of the West that religious issues are not to be settled by force. Yet it may be necessary…

FYI: the word “terrorist” dates back to the French Revolution. It then referred to the advocates of mass execution of suspected royalists – the infamous Reign of Terror. Robespierre and Saint-Just were the most notorious “Terrorists”.

May 26, 2009 - 12:20 pm 88. Hesperado:

Re: Rich Rostrom at #87:

“But to say that “Islam is at war with the world” is to say that the jihadists correctly interpret Islam – which means that all devout Moslems should join them.”

Do all those millions of devout but harmless Muslims you assume exist have no free will, responsibility and common sense? Even if around them the non-Muslim world claims that the jihadists correctly interpret Islam, does that majority of millions of devout yet harmless Muslims not have a choice to stand up and show the rest of the world how we got it wrong, and that Islam is in fact capable of peaceful co-existence with the rest of the world’s sociopolitical systems? One good way for them to do that is to organize, hunt down the jihadists, declare them takfir (non-Muslim) and punish them; and then make sure to continue this policy with heightened vigilance throughout the Muslim world against Muslims who might persist in twisting Islam. Since the devout yet harmless Muslims vastly outnumber the tiny minority of jihadists, this should be easy to do.

So why haven’t they done it? And why do most Muslims persist in obstructing a rational critical examination of Islam to see how, and to what extent, Islamic texts, history and culture nourish jihadism. This would be the reasonable thing to do — at least for reasonable and harmless people that this majority of millions of Muslims are supposed to be — beacuse it would help enormously to facilitate the process of reforming Islam and making sure that, as much as possible, elements in Islamic texts, history and culture do not continue to enable the misinterpretations that lead to fanaticism and jihadism.

But I don’t see Muslims doing this except for a few rare instances that prove the rule — and those Muslims are usually accused of “betraying” Islam anyway.

No, it should not be up to us to reform Islam, nor to mollycoddle Muslims and feed them milk & sugar when their own societies are spewing so much dangerous toxins into the global geopolitical ecology. It is up to them to show us, in massive and clear and unequivocable ways, that Islam really means peaceful co-existence with us.

Meanwhile, I wouldn’t hold my breath.

May 26, 2009 - 2:38 pm 89. kate b:

The Islamic calendar does not begin with Mohamet’s birth or death but with the 1st jihad, it’s raison d’etre. It bases it’s calendar and existence on its theo-politically endorsed terrorism, fighting in the cause of Alah, and by the example of Mohamet ‘the perfect man’ the example to follow and his disciples. The date of 9/11 was a ‘We’re back!’ for Islam as it is the date that Europe stopped the spread of Islam at the Gates of Vienna.

Pious Muslims do jihad, lasped/half-hearted/ignorant of the texts/’moderate’ Muslims steal Judeo-Christian values, or plain humanism and call it ‘the modern version of Islam’

May 26, 2009 - 2:50 pm 90. The Infidel Alliance:

Dear Rich Rostom,

Thanks for your thoughtful comments. But your defense of Islam actually stated the reality of Islam: “to say that “Islam is at war with the world” is to say that the jihadists correctly interpret Islam – which means that all devout Moslems should join them.” You hit the nail of truth directly on the head. Yes, Jihadists DO correctly interpret Islam!

We must be thankful that most Muslims, in their common humanity, reject the teachings and examples of Muhammed, and live peacefully. But they do so in contradiction to the mandates of Islam.

And to assert that declaring Islam itself as the problem would create I vastly greater conflict, I have to ask if you understand how vast the current conflict really is?

The truth is that Islam is already engaged in an ISLAMIC WORLD WAR of epic proportions:
- Islam against the Catholics in the Philippines
- Islam against the Christians in Indonesia
- Islam against the Buddhists in Thailand
- Islam against the Hindu’s in India
- Islam against Jews in Israel and everywhere they exist
- Islam against the Zoroastrians in Iran
- Islam against the Jews in Yemen
- Islam against the Coptic Christians in Egypt
- Islam against the Chaldean Christians in Iraq
- Islam against the animists & Christians in the Sudan
- Islam against the Christians in Nigeria
- Islam against the athiests in Europe
- Islam against train commuters in Spain
- Islam against tube riders in London
- Islam against airline passengers
- Islam against office workers in New York
- Islam against defense workers at the Pentagon
- Islam against merchant vessels off the horn of Africa
- Islam against U.S. Navy ships
- Islam against embassy workers in Kenya & Tanzania
- Islam against schoolgirls in Afghanistan & Pakistan
- Islam against freedom of speech at the U.N.
- Islam against novelist Salman Rushdie (death fatwa)
- Islam against cinematographer Theo Van Gogh (viciously murdered)
- Islam against Islamic converts to other religions
- Islam against Korean & Polish engineers (decapitated)
- Islam against journalist Daniel Pearl (decapitated)

And on, and on, and on……

So again, how much bigger do you think this ISLAMIC WORLD WAR can get?

~ The Infidel Alliance

May 26, 2009 - 2:58 pm 91. Banned by Huffpo:

Ref #’s 73, 82:

Better watch it, TIA; them’s more than fighting words to our Muslim buddies. You could end up with “the full Muslim” if you’re not careful!

May 26, 2009 - 4:16 pm 92. fred:

The reason why (thank God for this) most Muslims are not engaged in the jihad owes to the solid fact that most Muslims do not know Classical Arabic (or even Arabic), hence do not know what’s in the Qur’an. Islamic scholars generally do not approve of the Qur’an being read in any other language. In the madrassas the boys are expected to memorize the Qur’an’s surahs, not understand them. Sharia Law forbids kafirs (unbelievers) from reading the Qur’an and ahadith. Anyway, this is why very few Muslims know what’s in their sacred writings unless the imams and clerics tell them what is contained within those writings.

And the circle is sealed. The Qur’an is considered a divine dictation, hence it is perfect, uncreated, eternal, and literal truth.

These facts are generally not known to the vast majority of Westerners. You would not know these things unless you got the information from scholars who exist outside of official academic circles (those being compromised by political pressure or blandishments from Islamic regimes).

May 26, 2009 - 5:02 pm 93. The Infidel Alliance:

Dear #91 Banned By Huffpo,

I’m certainly aware of the risk, which is precisely why we MUST expose the truth & reality of this death cult.

As our friend #92 Fred so clearly and correctly points out, most people, Muslims and “infidel” alike, are actually quite ignorant of what is actually in the Islamic texts, the history of Islam, and the barbaric life of it’s sadistic founder Muhammed.

Islam is built upon 2 great lies:
1) That it is a “Religion of Peace”
2) That Muhammed was some sort of righteous “holy man”

The way to defeat Islam is simply to expose it critically and objectively to the light of day. The lies that support it are ultimately the weakness that will eventually make it crumble.

So, don’t fear, learn. Then help spread the truth!

~ The Infidel Alliance

May 26, 2009 - 6:44 pm 94. Banned by Huffpo:

# 92 Fred:

I’ve heard this. Good point. Similar to the Catholic church that discourages reading the Bible on your own, as priests are the only ones who have been educated enough to understand it.

Big difference is, you can still read a Bible because it’s in a language we can understand. And, you aren’t stoned or beheaded if you do.

May 26, 2009 - 8:03 pm 95. Greg:

Peggy#71: You could not write what you did had you read the Koran or lived in two differnt Islamic countries for over five years as I have. Muslims who actually DO practice their religion are the ones that most of the world are calling “radicals” or “extremists.” In fact, they are simply practicing Muslims. The “moderates” are Muslims who are not practicing fully what the Koran and Mohammed teach.

May 27, 2009 - 9:43 am 96. Banned by Huffpo:

#93 TIA:

You recognize reality; too bad the rest of the world doesn’t, reference the increasing trend to give Muslims enclaves in places like England, France, and Detroit.

“Death to the Infidel.” That really is the bottom line. And who are they? Any “unbeliever.”

Hang on to your hats. The sad part is we welcome them with open arms.

May 27, 2009 - 8:03 pm 97. wancow:

David Steinberg, Brilliant! Thank you!

Of interest here is this item on The Rodgers Plan. It’s a good read, especially when taking your article into account.

May 28, 2009 - 12:33 pm 98. wancow:

23 Fred.
“He (Muhammed) was a narcissistic personality disordered murderer, rapist, pedophile, liar, and scoundrel of the worst sort. In fact, he is one of history’s most evil men.”

Gee, Fred, tell us how you really feel! Be Careful, if you say this in Canada, they’ll arrest you! If you say it in England, they’ll kick you out.

May 28, 2009 - 12:35 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: