Tuesday, December 12, 2006

Changing the Venue

Yesterday’s discussion covered the moral imperatives for supporting the “Free Muslims”; now I’d like to consider the practical reasons for doing so.

This discussion dovetails with the recent meme of “We’re on Our Own,” so I’ll cover that aspect first.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Fighting the elephantThe recent election has confirmed that our little corner of the blogosphere — the members of the Counterjihad — will not be affecting public policy any time soon. Elected politicians and the members of the permanent foreign policy establishment, as exemplified by James Baker, are giving clear signals that they have no interest in or stomach for a real fight against the legions of Mohammed. The politicians have to keep an eye on the masters of seditious propaganda media and the next election. The bureaucrats, out of habit, or Jew-hatred, or complacency, or ignorance, are not going to think outside the box.

For at least two years — and more likely for a decade, after two Hillary administrations — what we advocate and strategize for will remain with us, the citizens of America and the free world, and not extend to the people who actually execute public policy on our behalf.

So I don’t want to hear any more prescriptions for public policy. Saying “We need to crack down on Saudi Arabia” or “It’s time we did something about the Salafists in Somalia” is pointless. None of it is going to happen.

When we talk like that, we’re spinning palaces out of gossamer, building castles out of airy nothing. We’re wasting our time.

If our government were capable of doing such things, we wouldn’t be mired so deeply in our current slough. The legacy media have a lockjaw grip on the manly fortitude of our elected leaders, and we just have to deal with it.

But that doesn’t mean we’re powerless — far from it. It just means that the potential for action has devolved from our national political leaders to where it belongs: local government, civic organizations, and the people themselves.

Assuming our First Amendment rights aren’t eroded any further by the courts — which they may well be, under either a McCain or Hillary administration — we can act forcefully and lawfully on behalf of the majority of our people, the ordinary people, people who have not succumbed to the PC propaganda, people who want to take back the culture.

If the First Amendment falls to the anti-Liberty forces of the state, then we will have to fall back on the Second Amendment. In the meantime, it’s time to reinvigorate the Tenth.
- - - - - - - - - -
It’s an ongoing process, one that will move slowly. It won’t get much publicity, and will take at least a decade to bear real fruit.

The bywords are: Rebirth and Resistance.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Which brings us back to the Free Muslims.

The Cold War wasn’t won solely by outspending the Soviets, or by superior firepower, or by better planes and submarines.

Those were crucial, but it was also won by many thousands of ordinary people in the West who acted collectively to reach out to dissidents and disaffected groups behind the Iron Curtain. There were Christian groups which equipped local churches in Poland and East Germany with computers, printers, and paper so that they could disseminate samizdat materials. Jewish groups contacted their oppressed co-religionists in the Soviet Union. Human rights groups co-ordinated with local dissident organizations in communist countries, and worked on a well-publicized campaign to force the Soviets to live up to their signature on the Helsinki Accords.

After Ronald Reagan was elected, this process gained the imprimatur of the United States government, which helped accelerate the collapse of the Soviet bloc. But it was going on before that, and it was inspired, organized, and executed by people without the help of government.

This is part of what we will be doing from now on in the Counterjihad. We didn’t write off the Lutherans in East Germany by saying, “They’re all Reds; to hell with them.” We didn’t say, “Let those Jewish refuseniks rot in the gulag. They’re part of the Soviet system.”

The same should be true of Muslims. It’s a serious strategic error to maintain the all-Muslims-are-evil meme, because you are thereby foreclosing cooperation with the Kurds or the ordinary Muslims in Bangladesh who are being overrun (and killed) by violent radicals. These people may not like us — and the Kurds have every reason not to trust Americans, thanks to the work of James Baker — but they are our natural allies.

To turn our natural allies into people that we have to kill does not make sense.

“Kill ’em all and let God sort ’em out.” That packs a nice emotional punch. It adds oxygen to the pure flame of righteous anger, and makes a person feel strong and dedicated to say it. But it serves no strategic purpose.

Sound strategic doctrine would argue for allying with truly dissident non-violent Muslim groups, both here and abroad.

Some of them might indeed hate Jews. Some of them might smile if America were destroyed.

But that just makes them the Josef Vissarionovich Djugashvilis of the Counterjihad. We deal with Uncle Joe now, while we need him. Later, after all the mujahideen have earned the 72 black-eyed ones, our relationship with the remaining Muslims may have to change — after all, they do revere the Koran and the Hadith — but, for now, we’re in the same fight together.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

The most important thing, however, is to realize that the fight has moved to a new venue. It’s not happening in the political arena any longer, and it can’t happen there for the foreseeable future. Our political leaders have abandoned the Counterjihad, and we have to continue it without them.

The topography of the battlefield has changed greatly since the 1970s, when we struggled against the Soviet empire. Back then mimeograph machines and reams of paper were the necessary substrate for the effort; now the internet, cell phones, instant messaging, and electronic networks define the battlefield.

This is an information war, and every single person who is connected to global communications is a combatant, whether he realizes it or not. That’s why we can enter the struggle as we are, in our pajamas. We don’t have to dump tea in the harbor or mount the barricades to fight it. We can stay within the law (at least here in the United States) and still be soldiers in the Counterjihad.

The enemy is way ahead of us in the field of 21st-century information warfare, but we are learning fast. Speed, agility, and flexibility; network security, investigation, research, and close communication: these are the weapons of choice.

It’s already happening, but you have to lift your eyes from the TV screen and the newspaper headlines to see it. You have to give up on Congress and the State Department. They’re a lost cause.

Get down to the county office building and see what’s going on. Watch the zoning hearings for the CAIR-affiliated Islamic centers. Pay attention to what’s in the curriculum at your kids’ school. Watch out for those “field trips” to the mosque!

Above all, connect with the others who are thinking the same way. There is strength in numbers, and that strength is already gathering into a non-sectarian and internationally networked movement.

For more information, see the CVF forum.

Or you can nuke the ragheads. Your choice.

39 comments:

The Anti-Jihadist said...

Same stuff posted twice? Take a look and fix...that's clearly within the power of us under-powered counter-jihad types.

Keep blogging, keep fighting.

Baron Bodissey said...

A-J -- I spotted it at once, but Blogger takes a looooong time to re-open a post...

Anonymous said...

It’s a serious strategic error to maintain the all-Muslims-are-evil meme

Not all Muslims are evil, but Islam is evil. That is the crucial point here. It would be a serious error to think that since not all Muslims are evil, that this somehow indicates that there exist benign versions of Islam.

Zenobia said...

What?! You gave up already?!! lol If I understand you correctly, your counterjihad is now about say-harassing Muslim moms at PTA meetings. tsk. tsk.

I read this blog a sometimes with morbid fascination. I just wonder how you could let a small group of terrorists make you loose your moral values (nuke the ragheads)?

We Muslims see the terrorists for what they are-a fringe psychotic group that can do great harm episodically, but a group that can be contained.

The Salafis are attracting a lot of followers because they are energetic, organized and well-funded. They are for the most part apolitical and in the end will just be another sect within Islam.

The Islamists (Muslim brotherhood) have already been tamed by Muslims and gave up Jihad a long time ago. They know aspire to get power via the ballot box. If in power, they will just be another party that might or might not be voted out depending on how they deliver in mundane issues such as JOBS. Like the govt of Saudi Arabia, they will end up working and cooperating with the west and east.

Where there is conflict between Muslims and non-Muslims, it has little to do with religion, and everything to do with the desire of an ethnic miniority to secede and form their own state. (Chechyna, Palestine, Kashmir, Thailand).

Muslim immigrants are not trying to islamize the West? Why would they want to? There is nothing about western values that precludes islamic values, and most people are that devout anyway. When issues come up (such as prayer rooms), they are no different than ones that other minority religions expect (house of worship, holidays etc. etc.)

So! You are chasing ghosts. People are people everywhere and concerned about mundane things like jobs, crime, bringing up their children with good values etc. etc.

The sad thing about the war on terror is how it is being taken advantage of by dictators who are sowing havoc on their people.cmhxgm

Redneck Texan said...

Who'd a thought goin mainstream would be so complicated.

I certainly see your point Baron, and I'm not trying to be disruptive here. But its going to be difficult to exclude the "Nuke em all" crowd from any counter-jihad. Most people who are passionate enough about it to have educated themselves on Islam are going to have a hard time adjusting to not being able to spew. And that spewing is going to reflect negatively on the cause from time to time. Its going to be difficult to find that balance between alienating the coveted Muslims and alienating the Islamophobic base.

You certainly have your work cut out for you.

One thing I would like to mention though, and dont have time to go into much detail at the moment, is that because you are looking so far into the future now, we could probably achieve the same end results (Changing our Leaders Perspective)......by doing absolutely nothing.

The clock is ticking on a catalyst of our enemy's choosing forcing our western leaders to come around to defending our civilization in earnest. There's going to come a time where they cant ignore the facts any longer, with or without our help.

Not suggesting the information war is not worth the trouble of waging, it certainly is, just saying our enemy is in a better posistion to change our leaders' perspective than we are. They could achieve in a minute what is going to take us years.

Canker said...

Zenobia,
I don't think it's as simple as `mostly honest working stiffs just trying to get on with their lives and avoid the crazies doing things in their name'.
I recommend taking a look at the interview with the chief editor of al-Jazeera over at JOSHUAPUNDIT or follow the link to my brief post on the subject: here
for an example of some of the problems associated with co-religionists minimising the danger of, to put it at its most bland, illogicality.
In particular, the Islamists have not given up and indeed have been re-energised by 9/11 and the second intifada.

Zenobia said...

Canker-I meant about the larger Islamic world and the issues of Islamism there.

The situation in Palestine with Israel is one of occupation and the desire for a Palestinian homeland. This issue as you know has grown to become a religious conflict (at least for some) with time.

I read the interview you cited. The editor is Palestinian and he thinks that everyone's life revolves about Palestine. I am not sure how you think his opinion connects to the Islamists.

ΛΕΟΝΙΔΑΣ said...

I agree with zenobia up to a point. I know Muslims who share those mundane values. What they also share (those I know) is a visceral hatred of jews. As for the "Palestinian" longing for a "homeland", they have always had it. It's called Jordan (formerly Trans Jordan). The Arabs who now call themselves "Palestinians" will not relent until Israel is eliminated as a nation state. I am not making a moral judgement here, merely a statement of fact.

Evanston said...

We wouldn't be talking about muslims if they didn't have oil money. Their violence would rapidly turn inward again, and they could kill each other happily as they have done for millenia with little impact on the outside world due to their tribal/feudal organizational mentality and feudal technology. Nothing will be done in the West until the next version of 9/11. Zenobia has loads of advice for us and I recommend that he/she should return to the middle east and fix it for us with all the other "reasonable" muslims. Until then, I recommend that all us soon-to-be-dhimmis go about the business of life and wait for the next attack. Engage in the true spiritual battle of Christ vs. the World. Peace on earth to men of good will. Merry Christmas!

Freedom Fighter said...

My goodness, looky what's going on here!

First off, Baron, enough with the defeatism. You know better and I KNOW you know better. History repeats itself,events have a way of catching up with our pre-conceptions.And if you still have doubts, read Ezekial's prophecies, which have been uncannily accurate of late.

PS: The Kurds are our friends and would love nothing better than for us to redeploy and put our bases there. They LOVE America.
****
Zenobia, here's how the chief editor of al-Jazeerah's views `connect' with Islamism - they are a classic example of the hatred and ENVY the Arabs bear towards Jews:

J O S H U A P U N D I T: al-Jazeera's Chief editor speaks out...`It's all Israel's fault! '

The mindset is there for everyone to see...and it is by no means limited to the Middle East.

IMO, your are also mistaken about the various conflicts around the world that involve Muslims having nothing to do with religion.

It has EVERYTHING to do with religion.

The OG Mo told his followers to fight the unbelievers until they either died, embraced Islam or `paid the jizya(tribute) willingly and felt themselves subdued.'

That was in 632CE, and for many Muslims, it is still the religous imperative they live by. Not `independence' but dominance - which is why, in most Muslim dominated countries
`kaffirs' are relegated to dhimmi, inferior status.

That, BTW is why there's such hatred among Muslims for Israel and the west. If dar harb, the non-Muslim world was weak, starving and poor that would be one thing. But the opposite being true is an intolerable challenge to the belief system of those who think that Islam and sharia are the highest state of mankind.

jrdroll said...

test

jrdroll said...

The situation in Turkey is one of occupation and the desire for a Orthodox Christain homeland. This issue as you know has grown to become a religious conflict (at least for some) with time.

Voltaire said...

So, Zenobia: radical Islamists have been contained in every country, and they never try to affect Western nations to which they emigrate--let alone do so violently.

I guess that must be true. That's why Afghanistan's Taliban never had a shot at power. Or why Palestine will never be controlled by Hamas... or by the orchestrator of the '72 Munich Olympic murders (which were a fluke anyway), who as we all know receded into nothingness soon after his misdeeds. Or why Hezbollah would never dream of infecting Lebanon's southern border. Or why Al Sadr doesn't have a chance in Hades of forming a militant shadow-government in Iraq.

That's also why Iran and Syria are ruled by sober, temperate leaders who distance themselves from fringe Mullahs--with statesmanlike firmness and resolve. That's why the House of Saud never has to bribe Islamist terrorist groups in order to stay in power for yet another year.

And I reckon that must also be why that relatively insignificant fringe we call radical Islam has never managed to persuade by violent intimidation outside of the conventional borders of the Middle East. When they tried to do mischief in Spain, they failed. When they tried in Britain, they failed. When they tried in the United States, they failed on an even more massive scale. When they tried in France, Chechnya, Bali, India or Russia they also failed.

And as far as Israel, we all know: all the problems in the Middle East would suddenly come to an end if Israel gave up just a little bit more of their massive surplus of square-mileage to poor oppressed, displaced Palestinians. That's why the Oslo accord was such a resounding triumph of reconciliation, reason and love for both sides.

That's why everybody started just getting along famously after the Gaza strip was evacuated in 2005. And that's why nobody in the Islamic world--let alone prominent clerics and elected and nonelected National leaders!--have ever as much as suggested annihilating Israel.

And I guess that's why government-sanctioned Islamic textbooks are a rare model of tolerance and respect for other religions, and why pigs and monkeys are only referred to en passant in the Biology and Ecology sections.

Please convince me that I haven't been asleep these past 40 years--in which case, I'd better sign up for a better wakeup-call service. Honest. I'm all ears.

Thomas the Wraith said...

We should certainly do more to help churches in Nigeria and Indonesia. And Lebanon (although some of the Christians are siding with Hizbollah). And we should do something, anything, to help Thailand with it's low-level civil war in the south. Likewise with the Copts in Egypt.

But this is not the Cold War. During the Cold War we were supporting Christians struggling against communism in countries that we Christian (though the governments were officially atheist). Solidarity and the Catholic Church could join forces against Polish communism because many, many Poles saw the Church as a greater moral authority than the government.

How can this happen in a place like Syria? The only group that I can think of with greater moral authority that the Assad gangsters is the Muslim Brotherhood. Not an encouraging thought.

Exactly the opposite is happening in Lebanon. Hizbullah is playing the role of Solidarity and Iran the role of the Church as they collude to overthrow the Lebanese state.

I agree whole-heartedly about the mosque zoning and the field trips. I have another suggestion: drive by the local mosque at Friday prayer time. See how many woman entering wear niqab and how many wear the hijab? The more faces you see covered, the more radical the mosque. The more female hair you see, the more Free Muslims.

johnCV said...

>>What?! You gave up already?!! lol If I understand you correctly, your counterjihad is now about say-harassing Muslim moms at PTA meetings. tsk. tsk.
I read this blog a sometimes with morbid fascination. I just wonder how you could let a small group of terrorists make you loose your moral values (nuke the ragheads)? >>

This was a rhetorical jab at what others were saying.


>>We Muslims see the terrorists for what they are-a fringe psychotic group that can do great harm episodically, but a group that can be contained. >>

I see. How’s that going for you? It doesn't appear to be working so well from our prespective. I suggest you view some statistics at www.thereligionofpeace.com to perhaps get a better idea of how well they are ‘contained’.


>>The Salafis are attracting a lot of followers because they are energetic, organized and well-funded. They are for the most part apolitical and in the end will just be another sect within Islam.
The Islamists (Muslim brotherhood) have already been tamed by Muslims and gave up Jihad a long time ago. They know aspire to get power via the ballot box. If in power, they will just be another party that might or might not be voted out depending on how they deliver in mundane issues such as JOBS. Like the govt of Saudi Arabia, they will end up working and cooperating with the west and east. >>

This is just simply BS. I am not going waste bandwidth on this obvious bit of deception.


>>Where there is conflict between Muslims and non-Muslims, it has little to do with religion, and everything to do with the desire of an ethnic miniority to secede and form their own state. (Chechyna, Palestine, Kashmir, Thailand). >>

Only about ethnic minorities? I’ll give you one guess what the common factor is between all of these ‘minorities’ is.
Give up? Islam.
What specific ethnicity are the jihais in Thailand and what is is the ethnic difference between them and the other portion of the country?
Kashmiris? Same question.
Nigerians? Same question.
Somalis? Same question.
Indonesians? Same question.


>>Muslim immigrants are not trying to islamize the West? Why would they want to? There is nothing about western values that precludes islamic values, and most people are that devout anyway. >>

They ‘want to’ because the koran says that they must.
You are correct, there is nothing oin Western Values to preclude islamic values. However the reverse of this is where we have the problem. Islamis values do preclude Western values. Go visit a church in saudi arabia. We can talk about uncovered meat in Australia, or honor killings in the UK, or Christain converts executed by the state, or the killing of females that have been raped, or females kept as sex slaves in the US.

>>When issues come up (such as prayer rooms), they are no different than ones that other minority religions expect (house of worship, holidays etc. etc.) >>

They are different situations and you know it. The prayer rooms are avaiable to all without regard to religion. The muslims seem to have problem that they should have dedicated rooms, or special places. The insist on the host culture bending to their needs such as muezzin calls in Hamtramk. They insist on special priviledges when they refuse to return the courtesy in islamic countries. Minority religions in islamic countries, when not outright banned, are so controlled and intimidated (dhimmis), they are not free to prosteltyze under penalty of death. Perhaps Western nations should reciprocate?


>>So! You are chasing ghosts. People are people everywhere and concerned about mundane things like jobs, crime, bringing up their children with good values etc. etc. >>

Sure – we’re all the same, just people trying to eek out a meager existance. I am confidant that there are many, probably a majority, of muslims who are good and decent people and of who I would enjoy spending time with. The problem is that these ‘good’ people are explicitly not controlling that element within that is waging war. At some point everyone must pick a side. That time is rapidly approaching and tangible actions will replace words.

>>The sad thing about the war on terror is how it is being taken advantage of by dictators who are sowing havoc on their people. >>

I am sure you are familiar with the term taqqiya.
I have read your blog and the constant theme running throught it and your post here is that ‘muslims are simply misunderstood, there’s no need to be alarmed. 'Muslims are only being used by evil dicatators or outside forces’.
Sure, it’s everybodys else’s fault. The muslims have not done anything to incur the scrutiny and (belatedly) rising mistrust of the West. Where have I heard that before?
Either you are incredibly naïve or deliberately lying about who and what malignant forces face Western civilization. You should go work for CAIR (if you don’t already). They need (another) amiable disinformation artist.

Zenobia said...

My computer crashed-hence the delay in responding..
My blog is about the War on Terror and how it is affecting the horn of Africa-espcially the democracy movement in Ethiopia (from the perspective of an Ethiopian Muslim). .


Anyways-back the subject matter. The war with Islamic radicalism in the Muslim world did not begin on 9-11, but almost a hundred years ago. Muslims have fought islamists for decades and defeated them in Egypt, Morrocco, Algeria, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Syria and Iraq (but not in Iran). The civil war in Algeria for example cost 100,000 lives. The islamists did not take over these countries and were either relegated to a fringe violent group that still cause problems every now and than (Bali for example), or have given up Jihad for the ballot box (Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt).

Where they have thrived is in situations of chaos and stress that is created from either a brutal invasion and occupation or in situations of ethnic conflict in whcih the miniority Muslim ethnic group is fighting for secession and independent homeland. The Taliban took over power in the aftermath of the the Soviet occupationthat totally ravaged Afghanistan (remember that war anyone?). All secular and educated Muslims left Afghanistan for the US leaving a power vacum to be filled by the mujaheeded turned Taliban.

Islamic radicals are also active in Chechyna, Kashmir, South Thailand and Palestine and in each case the Muslims belong to an ethnic group fighting for an independent homeland. Kashmiris are ethnically different than Indians, South Thais are ethnic Malays, Chechynians are different than Russians, and so on.

In a case like Somalia, one clan (the equivalent of an ethnic group) is using Islamism as a way to gain arms to fight and dominate the other clans, as well as liberate what they consider is Somali territory occupied by Ethiopia (the Ogaden).

In Nigeria, the conflict is also across ethnic lines, with Hausa Muslims versus Ibo Christians. Also Ibo Christians have fought Yoruba Christians as well.

As most of the bloggers on this forum are either Americans or Europeans, it is difficult for you to understand how third world ethnic divisions and the desire for self-determination (homeland) can contribute to civil war and lack of democracy-a situation where Islamic radicals can thrive. In the past, during the cold war era, all insurgencies figthing for a homeland were secualar socialists, but they lost ground when the Soviet Union fell.

So the violent islamic groups have taken over these struggles and hence their terror.

The world would be a much safer place if these ethinic homeland issues were resolved.


I am adding my voice here with a different prespective.

jrdroll said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Heroic Dreamer said...

"at the siege of Vienna in 1683.." - it was your blog banner that first alerted me to long history of this war. Like many blind-sided by 9/11, I knew very little about Islam or the Middle East in 2001. Thanks to this blog and many others, thanks to conversations with commentators and thanks to many books now being published about Islam (Future Jihad, the Looming Tower among them) I became educated. There are many others like me.

As Gates of Vienna first taught me, this war has been with us for a long time. Don't expect to win it quickly.

Your little corner of the blogosphere if it includes say, Mark Steyn, can and does influence public policy. Mark Steyn writes that he left a signed copy of America Alone with Pres. Bush

Defeatism is for the other guy. Take a break and then come back and fight so that Western civilization prevails.

jrdroll said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Baron Bodissey said...

jrdroll --

You are entitled to your opinion, and welcome to express it here, but only in a civil and temperate fashion. That means, among other things, no gutter language and no gratuitous name-calling.

You may rephrase and repost the comment I had to delete, provided that the new version meets the above standards.

Moonzoo said...

Truly, it is baloney posts like this by persons who ought to know better, which signal that jihad will win.

"Counterjihad"? ... omg ... that would be so funny, if it were not so pathetic. It is this sad notion that we are playing some game like Halflife which is so depressing. How about War on Jihad?

Oh no, we can't have that, because of the "free" muslims who might shiver by hearing the word war. We cannot offend them. We must reach out to them.

And the straw alternative is "nuke the ragheads"? Oh, what a sweet morally superior person who says that is the alternative, condemning those who err (and they do err) on the side of standing up for the West.

How about this? Something logical, and to the point? Not nuke the ragheads, but telling the ragheads their religion is infantile, irrational, violent, primitive, anti-human, and the epitome of all that is worst in human nature?

Oh no .. cannot have that ... because that crosses a barrier -- even tho true -- which all believers do not want crossed, because of their insecurity in their own faith.

We cannot criticize islam and mohammed worship in the same way we criticize national socialism, fascism, or communism, by analyzing the sources, the philosophy and the logic. No, islam and mohammed worship is excempt, so let's just call it something they dont call themselves, or believe, like islamism or islamo-fascism.

There are brilliant, well intentioned folks who cannot bear to see the thing for what it is. They think that "free" or "moderate" mohammed worshippers will somehow, someway, carry the day, sharing the half-life view of folks who do not want to see things for what they are.

No, it is not nukes. It is a grave disservice to the West, and a profound service to the worship of mohammed, to cast the debate in those terms, as if that was what it truly is about.

It takes courage and absolute intellectual honesty to call islam what it is. Islam, not "islamism," or "islamo-fascism."

And perhaps it takes some insight, which is not available to many Western intellectuals, even those who think they have have got their hands on something, they call "islamism".

Redneck Texan said...

You certainly bring an interesting perspective to the discussion Zenobia. Its not everyday that I run across a literate female Ethiopian Muslim, thats for sure.

Your comments here and at your blog are drenched in bias, but living in a glass house myself, I wont throw rocks at you for that.

And I will also have to cede the political situation on the horn to you as well, all I really know about it is what I read in the what you "Christian Propaganda Mouthpieces", and we call the liberal MSM, while you live in the nightmare.


" I just wonder how you could let a small group of terrorists make you loose your moral values"

But I dont think you fully appreciate our perspective either. The international Islamists dont stay up late at night trying to figure out a way to attack Ethiopia. If they ever get their hands on a Nuclear device you can rest assured they wont explode it in Ethiopia. Being the main target does give us some latitude in how much we decide to blame all Muslims for the actions of terrorists who kill us in the name of Islam.


"Islamic radicals are also active in Chechnya, Kashmir, South Thailand and Palestine and in each case the Muslims belong to an ethnic group fighting for an independent homeland."

Gee....I notice a trend there dont you?.....they're all MUSLIMS using violence to carve an "independent" niche out of a sovereign country. Without even weighing the merits of their claims for the moment, how come there are no examples of militant Christians using violence to carve out an independent niche in a currently Muslim country?

Why is it always the poor Muslim freedom fighters who feel they have the moral high ground in any dispute where they are trying to gain political control through violent means? Usually of the indiscriminate variety.

What would happen to a Christian community inside a established predominately Muslim country if they tried the same stunt? Would the defending Muslim controlled government show as much tolerance and compromise and the governments of Russia, India, Thailand, and even Israel do?

There is documented historical evidence that Islam has spread, and is spreading, by the sword. They move into an adjacent culture, demand tolerance and scream persecution, until they gain control violently, then they slam the door of tolerance shut and move on to the next target. You should know this historical fact better than anyone here. You can see the front line moving south past your current position.

Should we not be alarmed about that? Should we not be alarmed that radical Islam's ultimate target, after they achieve their often repeated goal of exterminating the Jews, is to smite America in the name of Allah?

jrdroll said...

Hey Baron Bodissey

Islam IS AN EVIL DEATH CULT. Read the MOONGOD Manual the Koran. Hey JEW ISLAM WILL KILL YOU. ASK THE DINNER JACKET.ASK SPENCER. ASK BIN LADEN.

Papa Ray said...

Jeez, and two years ago I was nearly banned on many conservative websites (and actually banned on many liberal websites) for saying that Islam was the problem.

That was even before I started calling it a cult.

Wonder what the prevailing attitude will be in another couple of years?

Oh well, nevermind, I'll most likely have kicked the bucket by then.

Papa Ray
West Texas
USA

npabga said...

Ok Zedonia, you mention how the Chechnya is an ethnic conflict, which just happens to have Islamist involved. To a point, to a certain time, you are right, however the war in Chechnya has taken a strong Islamic character.

At first, the Chechens were generally moderate Sufi Muslims, more spiritual, with shrines and saints, and because the USSR was an atheist state, Islam, like other religions weren't strongly practiced generally. In fact, religion was just another part of their ethnicity and not practiced except in small pockets in the mountains.

The Chechens also had memories of there exile to Siberia by Stalin during WWII by Stalin. About a 1/3 of them died. Dadayev, the first Chechen "president", was a kid during this time. Dadayev pushed for an independent Chechnya, which the Russians refused.

Russia was willing to allow autonomy to Chechnya, much like the one given to Tatarstan, a majority Muslim region in Russia. Dadayev though refused to compromise- only independence. Russia by this time, just after the USSR's collapse, was very sensitive to any further territorial losses and felt that it could have an easy victory.

The war was of course brutal, as wars tend to be. Dadayev because of his refusal to compromise and to gain international support, turned to Islam. He wasn't religious; in fact he said that he prayed 3 times a day. A regular cynical pol who uses religion.

As the war took on a more Islamic character, it became even more brutal, with Saudi Arabia throwing money and Islamic fighters from around the world joining the cause. And when Islam becomes involved, the methodology of waging warfare changed. Terror became the norm. Attacks on innocent non-muslins who had nothing to do with the actions of the Russian government began. The captures of hospitals became routine, causing the deaths of innocent Russians. Nord Ost, metro and airplane bombings, and Beslan became representative of Jihad.

Sure, the catalyst was Dadayev's inability to compromise and to a much lesser extent ethnic (after all many many ethnic groups were forcefully deported besides the Chechens, and they haven't tried to secede)

But why does this war continue today? Islam makes it seethe today. Many foreign fighters, with religious zealotry that would make Mohammad proud, will not let the Chechens have peace.

The Chechens, being not particularly religious, want peace, though they won't get it as long as the more religious Muslims, who take Mohammad and his teachings seriously, still exist.

If you think that Russia should just withdraw, and then the Islamic fighters would melt away, then I am afraid that you would be very wrong. Russia did withdraw for a period of almost four years in the late 90s. De facto independence saw a huge increase in kidnappings (though this has always been a part of the Chechen and previous Islamic culture). Murders were common. Chechnya became a drug transit point. Islamists, who were at the time small in number, began to grab power when the Russians weren't there. The Islamists, getting more money, men, and material, and inspired by the Koran, began to invade neighboring regions of Russia, untouched by the war, such as Dagestan, in order to spread Islamic/Sharia law. Russian's beat back this attack, and recognizing that Chechnya cannot be left as an Islamic mini-state, invaded it a second time.

The cause of Russia's second invasion had nothing to with ethnicity - but everything to do with ISLAM.

oh do you support the Islamists in Somalia? Could you explain how ethnicity and not religion is involved in the current Somalian problem?

Thanks in advance

npabga said...

oh if you interested

Something about Ethiopia

And something that has ties to your post about things being primarily ethnic in character.



Take care!

Anonymous said...

How about War on Jihad?

That's almost as bad as "War on terrorism". It should be War on Islam.

And the straw alternative is "nuke the ragheads"?

Maybe I don't read this blog often enough, but I don't really see a lot of people here who want to "nuke the ragheads".

The real alternative is to realize that Islam and the West are incompatible, and therefore to contain and isolate Islam in the Islamic world. Islam doesn't belong in the West, so no significant amount of Muslims should be allowed to live there. That should of course also apply to those "Free Muslims", since the fact that they call themselves Muslims indicates that they haven't given up their evil death cult.

Profitsbeard said...

The Koran, itself, doesn't allow for "Free Muslims" ("Islam" is "Submission", after all), so the entire idea is an unorthodox pipe dream.

Apostates I like.

But those who continue to consider themselves Muslims and who persist in believing in the rambling, vicious revenge fantasies of a pedophile warlord, as documented in the "Recitation" (and "Hadiths"), I can do without.

Let them stay in their "Islamic" lands and slowly learn to civilize -or annihilate- themselves. Either rise beyond the age-old homicidal Sunni-Shi'ite schism- that has recurrently consumed their creed since its bloody inception- or collapse into its dogmatic carnage and chaos.

Free from Islam, yes.

But "Free Muslims" is like a "Non-Refective Mirror". A self-negating formulation.

Let them bail out of their joyless mindlock and join the freedom-loving people of the world.

Or is the Koranic threat of death -for anyone who dares to leave the cult- too intimidating?

(Suggested reading for wavering Mohammedans: "THE GOD THAT FAILED".)

Zerosumgame said...

Baron,

With Ahmedicrazy getting nukes in Tehran, America would not even make it through two Hillary Administrations -- at least not without dozens of our cities being nuked to oblivion -- while Queen Shrillary and the leftist media-academia complex blame Bush and the Jews for the nukes.

Zenobia said...

Redneck Texan,

It really blows my mind when Americans express the concern about terrorists using a nuclear device against them. Why? Because it is the West and Israel that has the trillion dollar military with hundreds of nuclear bombs. If anyone should be concerned it should be Muslims no? The chances of America being attacked with a nuclear device by
say Russia (by mistake) or North Korea is greater than by a rag-tag terrorist outfit. For persons from the southern hemisphere (regardless of religion) who see the West as ever powerful with it's vast military and economic powers, the deep fear many Westerner citizens have for a small primitive outfit of terrorists is perplexing and seems overly exaggerated. I do try to understand it because 9-11 was so shocking and devastating, but even still...

I gave you a list of ethnic conflicts involving Muslims only to make the point that they have to do with ethnic homeland issues. There are many other ethnic conflicts that involve non-Muslims. I assumed you knew that. For example, Sri Lanka involves Hindu suicide bombers (tamil ethnicity) fighting buddihist sinhalese for an ethnic homeland. This is one of the worst conflicts in the world today.

You also have various Christian militant movements fighting for ethnic homelands. In India, in the north East. In Burma, the Karen ethnic group. In Indonesia, the East Timorese in the past (now they have their own country). In all these cases, the dominant ethnic group, whether Muslim, Hindu or Buddhist was brutal to the minority group involved. I never meant to suggest that in the case when the state is controlled by a Muslim ethnic group, they treat the minority religious group fighting for a homeland any better. Of course they do not! States whether is is Muslim, Jewish or Hindu or Buddhist or Christian are brutal to their ethnic minorities that are trying to secede. What I do see though, is that if the group fighting for a homeland is Christian, the US does intervene in their behalf to support them. So the US imposed sanctions against Indonesia in behalf of East Timor, against Sudan in behalf of the Christian South, against Burma in behalf of the Karen Christians. But the problems involving Muslim ethnic groups are not addressed because there is no powerful advocate for their cause in the international community with real clout. So their problem festers on and on forever unresolved....

AS for how Islam was spread-it depends where and when. Certainly, Christianity was spread in Europe, ME, South America , Africa and Asia by force as well. In this day and age, no one can force people to change the religion of a society by force-those days are over. The religious demographics of the globe are pretty much established at this point. They might shift slightly due to immigration or birth rates, but not by that much.

As for Muslims and Jews-the issue is of a Palestinian state. PLO, the arab league and even HAMAS have agreed to recognize Israel in exchange for Israel and the world recognizing a Palestinian state. How clear can they be?

It is Christians that have tried to totally exterminate Jews in the past, not Muslims. I get the impression that Christians project on Muslims what they have done. Palestinian state-end of the story.

What do you mean Islam's target is the US? Do you thing that 1.5 billion Muslims are trying to destroy the US?
Take a trip to a Muslim country to get a sense of how people are there.
Al-Queda is a tiny terrorist outfit. Again why do you let them psyche you?

Zenobia said...

npaga,

I agree with most of what you wrote about Chechyna, especially about the fact that the Islamists took over a national independence movement and turned it into a religious war. I think you are unfair to the leader of Chechyna though. It was my impression that he accepted the compromise with Russia, but that the Islamists which he could not control instigated a second round of conflict with Russia. They do not want a compromise in which Chechyna stays part of Russia. They are not realistic, but can you really blame them? You also seem too sympathetic to the intentions of Russia. Putin's Russia is a brutal state, and there is no excuse for the way it conducted the war in Chechyna-it was horrible. In a just world, Chechnans deserve their independence. How could they be asked to compromise and be part of a country that deported the entire population to Kazkstan?. The deportation resulted in thousand dying- freezing to death or starving or from disease.

Chechyna is a tragedy all around.

As for Ethiopia and Somalia-you need to read more on these two countries. Ethiopia is not at war with the islamist govt of Sudan, but is at war with the Islamist movement in Somalia. Why? Ethiopia is also at war with the secular govt of Eritrea.Why? Answer-disputed territory called the Ogaden. Ogaden has an ethnic somali population that want to secede from Ethiopia. Ethiopia fears the Islamists in Somalia will help them (and they are right). So here again, it is an issue of ethnic nationalism. Ethiopia has no territorial issues with the Islamists in Sudan-so no war. Territorial issues exist between Ethiopia and Eritrea-both with secular govt.-so conflict.

There is more to ethiopia than war with the Islamists in Somalia. Read about the anuak genocide, the human rights abuses of the current govt, and the opposition of the people to the present regime.

Redneck Texan said...

Al-Qaeda, Zedonia, does not scare me near as much as letting Muslims elect a leadership of their choice does.

I personally would rather deal with a Arab nationalist dictator like Mubarak in Egypt than the Muslim Brotherhood, which as you suggested, would be swept into power if elections in Egypt were truly fair.

The Muslims who have been allowed to vote in Iran (yes I know the candidates are vetted by the guardian council), Iraq, Palestine, and Lebanon, have all made their decisions based on how their Cleric instructed them to vote.

If Pakistani elections were fair Islamists could very well assume command of their growing Nuclear arsenal.

Fair elections in Indonesia and Turkey have led to the Islamist having increased influence and a freer hand to commit violence there.

Al-Qaeda dont worry me near as much as the Islamic clergy itself gaining the resources of state, through their elected proxies, or the spectre of the radical Islamic mindset making policy decisions.

I got to honest with you, I dont share my President's faith in bringing Democracy and Freedom to the Muslim world being in our best interests. I personally could care less about the Muslim's plight in those flash points you consider struggles for independence. I just want them to stop attacking us.

We are exploring the compassionate route to make them stop for the time being, pumping our resources in to prop up a failed culture, but I think its becoming more obvious everyday that's unsustainable when the tentacles of corruption and sectarian hatred run so deep into their psyche.

Its just a matter of time before the Jihadis you share a holy book with force us to adopt the indiscriminate violence tactics they have perfected, but on a vastly larger scale.

I am sorry if that means we have to destroy millions of innocent Muslims to get to the bad ones, but they're not really innocent are they? They are guilty of either failing to police their fellow violent adherents attacking us in their religions name, or more likely tacitly supporting those attacks as a victory for "their side".

I am just tired of being played for a fool Zedonia. We have groups of Muslims telling us Islam is the "religion of Peace", and we groups of Muslims screaming "Allah Akbar" when they are cutting my fellow infidels heads off.

Which group should I believe?

Zenobia said...

"Which group should I believe?"

What you believe is dependent on your conscience and God.

npabga said...

It really blows my mind when Americans express the concern about terrorists using a nuclear device against them. Why?


Why concern? Maybe because several Islamic terrorist group have expressed interest in aqcuiring nuclear weapons to continue there Jihad. Osama bin Ladin himself has attempted to buy nuclear weapons in the past. And besides, how can one deter a group who embraces death as a means to show loyalty to capricious Allah?


Because it is the West and Israel that has the trillion dollar military with hundreds of nuclear bombs. If anyone should be concerned it should be Muslims no?



Why should the Muslims be concerned about such a large military and nuclear weapons? The West and Israel have not threatened the Muslim world with nukes. If the West had a desire to use them, they would have already. For example, the Israeli military- by far the best in the region- has shown miltary restraint in the Gaza and the West Bank. Once in a while there is a malfunction in the weapons systems or they make a mistake, but Israel’s motivation is not to wipe out the Palestinians, but just security within its borders and not to be under the threat of terrorism. However Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, and many other’s raison d’ etre is to push Jews into the sea. The religion of peace…such tolerance!!!!

Maybe it should be noted that Isreal aftering capturing the Dome of the Rock did not destroy it, but allowed Muslims even to this day to worship there and to run the mosque. Compare this with Ahmadinajad’s statements, those of Hezbollah and Hamaz, and the clerics throughout theMiddle East during Friday prayers.

The chances of America being attacked with a nuclear device by
say Russia (by mistake) or North Korea is greater than by a rag-tag terrorist outfit.



Wrong. since the end of the cold war the US has been working with the Russian government to prevent accidental launches and securing Russian nuclear weapons. Kim Jung Il will not use nukes, unless he is going to lose power anyways and it is his last hurrah. Kim Jung Il loves life/movies/women on earth to give this up in a nuclear war. Again, many Muslims kill for the chance to get those 72 virgins.


For persons from the southern hemisphere (regardless of religion) who see the West as ever powerful with it's vast military and economic powers, the deep fear many Westerner citizens have for a small primitive outfit of terrorists is perplexing and seems overly exaggerated. I do try to understand it because 9-11 was so shocking and devastating, but even still...


And that is fine for the people of the Southern hemisphere. But hopefully they recognize if the West does not deal with this threat we will be the ones to pay with a loss of at least one of our cities and many innocent lives.


I gave you a list of ethnic conflicts involving Muslims only to make the point that they have to do with ethnic homeland issues. There are many other ethnic conflicts that involve non-Muslims. I assumed you knew that. For example, Sri Lanka involves Hindu suicide bombers (tamil ethnicity) fighting buddihist sinhalese for an ethnic homeland. This is one of the worst conflicts in the world today.


And I have shown how the Chechen war is now one of religion- not ethnic. I agree that Tamil Tigers are figthing for a homeland, and using suicide bombers. This is an ethnic war. But yet peace was so close a couple years ago. Unfortunately when Islam is involved, these wars are far more intractable.

Sri Lanka – the exception that proves the rule!


You also have various Christian militant movements fighting for ethnic homelands. In India, in the north East. In Burma, the Karen ethnic group. In Indonesia, the East Timorese in the past (now they have their own country). In all these cases, the dominant ethnic group, whether Muslim, Hindu or Buddhist was brutal to the minority group involved.


First I didn’t assume that you meant to say that Muslim majority countries treat there minorities with respect. Ok with what is happening in India, Burma (Karen are not just Christian but Buddhist and aniumist as well) or with the East Timorese, all these militant movements…do not kill use or cite their “holy books” in order to kill innocent peopole. That is the scary thing. In fact, all of these militant groups have targetted civilians far less than Islamic ones.

In fact with East Timor, for about 20 years about 60-200 thousand East timors will killed by Indonesua…the World then pushed for elections. East timor, unsurprisingly choose indepence…In come the Indonesians and Muslims again to slaugter, and only after Worldwide condemnation did the Indonesians relent.


What I do see though, is that if the group fighting for a homeland is Christian, the US does intervene in their behalf to support them. So the US imposed sanctions against Indonesia in behalf of East Timor, against Sudan in behalf of the Christian South, against Burma in behalf of the Karen Christians.


And the Bosnian Muslims? The Kosovar Alabanian Muslims? We actually fought launched missles and killed to protect these people. And your example of US favoritism of Christians over Muslims are embargoes? Yeah…..

The great lie - that America only kills Muslims and supports other countries who kill them


But the problems involving Muslim ethnic groups are not addressed because there is no powerful advocate for their cause in the international community with real clout. So their problem festers on and on forever unresolved....


What seems to fester are wars with Muslims, sure the US and the West could stop the genocide that has already killed 200,000 in darfur, but the Muslim world won’t stand for that!


As for how Islam was spread-it depends where and when. Certainly, Christianity was spread in Europe, ME, South America , Africa and Asia by force as well. In this day and age, no one can force people to change the religion of a society by force-those days are over. The religious demographics of the globe are pretty much established at this point. They might shift slightly due to immigration or birth rates, but not by that much.


Converting people by force is legitimized by the Koran. Not in the Bible. Not in the Torah.


As for Muslims and Jews-the issue is of a Palestinian state. PLO, the arab league and even HAMAS have agreed to recognize Israel in exchange for Israel and the world recognizing a Palestinian state. How clear can they be?


Source about Hamas recognizing Israel? Explicitly and recently? I have a couple sources:

However Israel has been been clear that if Palestine and other nations recognize Israels right to exist and renounce terror attacks, then Palestinians could have there own state. (though I admit this is simplified)


It is Christians that have tried to totally exterminate Jews in the past, not Muslims. I get the impression that Christians project on Muslims what they have done. Palestinian state-end of the story.

Tu quoque? So now it is ok for some Islamic groups, who quote the Koran, to carry out genocide?
Also
Hitler was not a Christian. He only used religion at the very beginning, and that was it. Naziism is not a Christian Ideolgy. Please reaserch this further

This bears repeating I get the impression that Christians project on Muslims what they have done.

Funny because I get the same impression about Muslims in general who fear Israeli nuclear weapons or US military might!!! They, the more ardent Islamists, tell us time again what their goals are- push Israel to into the sea, quoting the Koran like 9:29, 9:5, and 8:39 to wage war against all unbelievers…

Again though, we show restraint and don’t target civilians at all!!! Unlike say Hezbollah’s, Hamas’s or al Qaeda’s M.O.

Palestine state- end of story? That is too simple and is used by those who think that Israel is the reason there is no peace

What do you mean Islam's target is the US? Do you thing that 1.5 billion Muslims are trying to destroy the US?
Take a trip to a Muslim country to get a sense of how people are there.
Al-Queda is a tiny terrorist outfit. Again why do you let them psyche you?


I don’t think Muslims as a whole are targeting the US… however there are many Muslims who would love to see the destruction of an infidel US. I have no problem with Muslims. The nicest ones in my limited travels are the Bosnian Muslims. They aren’t particularly religious. However you must recognize that in Islam is divided into Dal al harb, and Dal al Islam…the house of war and the house of peace. In Islam unlike anyother religion, preaches to its followers that Islam is to be the ONE religion and that to do this will entail fighting.

Take care and apologies for the spelling...no spell check :)

npabga said...

Quote:
.....but that the Islamists which he could not control instigated a second round of conflict with Russia. They do not want a compromise in which Chechnya stays part of Russia. They are not realistic, but can you really blame them? You also seem too sympathetic to the intentions of Russia.


Hey...I think again it is important to recognize that many many ethnic groups were deported by Stalin. In only Chechnya did war break out. Dudayev's unwillingness to compromise happened before the start of the war in 1994. Dudayev declared an independent sate earlier in 1991, refused to sign the Federation Treaty, dissolved parliament to maintain power, and ethnic Russians and other peoples were forced out by violence, all before the war. He was killed in 1996 before the second round of hostilities. The fact that you recognize that the Islamists hijacked this independence movement before the second war, is proof of the religious nature of this war. They don't want Chechnya to be apart of Russia? Who is "they"? The Islamists. Can I blame them? Hell yeah! The Chechens not being particularly full of Islam want peace. The foreign terrorists do not. I blame them (these foreign fighters) for precipitating the second war. and I think Putin is horrible.

Ethiopia is not at war with the islamist govt of Sudan, but is at war with the Islamist movement in Somalia.
Correct me if I am wrong- I don't think I said anywhere that Ethiopia was involving itself in Sudan... Please point out where I said that.

Ethiopia is involved in Somalia, in that they have sent a couple hundred advisors (of note they are to support the internationally recognized government).

Yes I know about the Eritrean conflict, but I think you saying that this is mostly ethnic is a stretch. Somalia is a failed state that since 1991 has been ruled by warlords. This new Islamic army in Somalia is not ethnic in character- it is purely religious. Motivated by the Quran to wage war against unbelievers and apostates (note the calls for Jihad, in places were this force became the authority, Sharia law is implemented, and that those who worship 5 times a day will be beheaded).

And so what if Ethipoia is concerned about ethnic Somalis? Fine, they worry about ethnic issues like others. Countries of the former Soviet Union with their ethnic Russians populations, the countries of South East Asia with their Chinese and Hindu populations, so does Romanians with there large number of Hungarians, the Roma in general everywhere, etc. etc. But you know something? None of these groups ethnic minorities are as violent as those with Islam as a religion. Ethiopia should have a greater concern than say Estonia with the Russians.

Lets name areas were Muslims are the minority, and are peaceful?

I will read about the genocide - please read about Islam's inherent brutality called for by the Koran and the Hadiths.

Take care

npabga said...

oh I nice little fact I forgot...The Ingush.

Muslims like the Chechens, deported by Stalin like the Chechens, and formally a part of Chechnya that detached itself to form Ingushetia in 1992 to join the Russian Federation.

Sure a couple Ingush, no doubt motivated by Islam, have fought for the Chechens against the infidels (see Beslan)

But the whole thing about this being an ethnic battle is nuts. Chechen and the Ingush are very close relatives culturally. Unfortunately, because they are a part of Russia, the kind fundamentalist Muslims, have invaded them time and again….to spread the love of Islam by the sword. The Ingush in general want nothing to do with living under an Islamic state, nor want independence from Russia, but hey, the Koran says that to fight those who rule over Muslims everywhere, what can they the innocent do about a religion prone to violence?

DarkStar said...

To Redneck Texan’s long, intelligent answer to her previous points,
showing great knowledge, and clearly showing errors on her part,
Zedonia’s entire response was:

Zenobia said...
"Which group should I believe?"
What you believe is dependent on your conscience and God.

?

... and which group does she believe?
(Hint: Only one is supported by the Koran...)

I could show additional inaccuracies of hers.
Like about demographic shifts. how long ago was Lebanon a majority
CHRISTIAN nation? …just a few decades.
Palestine was 20 % Christian less than 100 years ago.
Similar trends in Turkey, Kashmir, and many other countries.
5 MILLION Muslims live in “no-go” zones in FRANCE !!!
30% of the young people in France are Muslims…

…but she says, don’t worry, the demographics never change much…

…and we shouldn’t worry about terrorists having just one bomb,
because we have thousands ? huh?

… maybe she is right, and we just shouldn’t worry.
But then, why is she trying so hard to reassure us ?
Fact is, hard line Islam is on the rise all over the world.
Women’s rights is not high on their agenda.
…why isn’t SHE worried ?

And even if she is sincere, and not just misinformed,
ProfitsBeard was correct (along with Spencer, Trifkovic, etc. ):

Profitsbeard said...
The Koran, itself, doesn't allow for "Free Muslims" ("Islam" is "Submission", after all), so the entire idea is an unorthodox pipe dream.


The Koran is VERY clear – “FreeMuslims” are NOT Muslims.
They can claim it, but it clearly and emphatically rejects any who would modify it’s message.
Islam already went through it’s “reformation”.
The Mutazalite period.
They lost, and the Hanbal followers won.

"
But the “Golden Age” was not even a result of Islam. The so-called Golden Age of Islam, which did give rise to scientists, Philosophers, and scholars, was dominated by a departure from Islamic principles and toward secular free thinking. The zeitgeist of the Golden Age was a strong Islamic heresy called Mutazili, from the 8th century (early in Islam’s reign) in Basra (the Islamic city of terror in Iraq!). It was sponsored by a number of Caliphs, but was known throughout the empire as a dangerous heresy to Islam, and was eventually suppressed. This interpretation of Islam contradicted the Koran, but supported a level of academic freedom that allowed Islam to absorb Western culture from the Greeks, Romans, and Eastern ideas from Persia and India. Under its influence, “Islam” advanced in knowledge to the precise degree that it diluted or rejected Islamic authority.
"
http://www.islam-watch.org/CSKarlson/IslamRevisionism.htm


And Redneck Texan was right.
FreeMuslims, even if they are honest and sincere,
are simply a diversion of resources.

Does anyone recall the original topic here ?
... it wasn't about "ethnic Somalis".

We have had war declared on us, and yet some of our best and brightest thinkers here, are busy tracking down her “mistakes”.
Her "ethnic wild goose hunt"...

Even if Zedonia is honest and sincere, if I were a wahabbi, for strategic reasons,
I’d FUND her website ! …it gives “cover” and distraction.
Straight out of the Prophet’s guide to:

“fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war)” 9.005

The Koran cannot be modified, by definition.
And also by definition, it declares war on ALL who do not believe it. Including FreeMuslims, Sufi's, etc.

We ARE at war. Christians, Hindus, and Buddhists, and yes, even the honest "moderate" Muslims, are dying all over the world.

And we are discussing how to spare the feelings of people who still believe in the book responsible for all the deaths ?

Tolerance of the intolerant is a suicide pact.

Saharians said...

I, for one, predict that resorting to exercising our First Amendment rights will fail and we will be compelled to exercise our Second Amendment rights, which is when the situation will really get ugly. Things are moving rapidly in that direction every day.

But anyway, enough with the defeatism on this wonderful blog...!

If we're supposed to be fighting for Western civlization, what sort of civlization are we weeking to prserve? A civlization given to liberalism, dhimmitude, Big Macs, multiculturalism, MTV, porn, secularism, mass non-white immigration, etc.? I want to fight to eradicate Islam from the West, sure, but I am just as interested in removing from power and influence (...and life) the people and entities that facilitate the dominance in our society of these things.

DarkStar said...

Sorry Saharians. I’ll be proud to exercise the 2nd amendent by your side when the time comes, but while I dislike many things in our liberal society, I cannot see equating Big Macs and MTV with a global war on terror, that is being LOST in places like formerly Christian Lebanon.

And sorry if this sounds like brown-nosing, but I’ve read and admired the Baron for years.
And he is right! – we will NOT be affecting public policy soon, even about terrorism and nuclear threats:

Yesterday’s discussion covered the moral imperatives for supporting the “Free Muslims”; now I’d like to consider the practical reasons for doing so.

This discussion dovetails with the recent meme of “We’re on Our Own,” so I’ll cover that aspect first.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The recent election has confirmed that our little corner of the blogosphere — the members of the Counterjihad — will not be affecting public policy any time soon.


… someone pointed out that fundamentalists will control Pakistan,
and their nukes, after Musharraf is gone.
Libya had a nuclear program NO ONE knew about.
Also, we are also losing ground in Africa, which has some of the world’s largest Uranium resources, in addition to others.
Our technology means nothing, if we cannot use it.
And eventually, they will have it. And use it.

But I'm not a defeatist. I'm listening to people like Spencer and the Baron, and looking for ways to help.
Once my children’s survival is assured
(and their freedom to not wear a burka),
then I’ll worry about the effects of Big Macs and MTV on them.
Until then, I want to do all I can, now.
The 910 group is a great start I think.