Saturday, November 11, 2006

When blindness leads otherwise smart people to draw false conclusions

In a post at the excellent Power Line, the West's fundamental inability (or unwillingness) to publicly admit and address the fact that the will of Allah and his false prophet--as revealed in Qur'an and Sunnah--inspires and sustains the global jihad against us (and all other non-Muslims) raises its ugly, decapitated head. Paul writes:
In my view, Iraqi participation in elections, sometimes at great personal risk, goes a long way towards answering those who say there's something in the Iraqi (or Arab) DNA that is incompatible with the administration's democracy project. Unfortunately, though, more was required of the Iraqi peoople than just voting. The situation called on them to elect leaders who would work in good faith for national reconciliation, rather than tilting substantially in the direction of one sectarian faction. The Iraqis failed to do this when they voted in the Shia-militia-friendly Malacki government, thereby making it difficult, if not impossible, for the U.S. to work with the current government to curb sectarian violence.

The Iraqis, of course, are not the first people to make a very bad decision at the polls. The fact that they did so is not necessarily evidence of some national 'genetic' flaw, much less a demonstration that democracy can't work in the Middle East. It just means that the Iraqi people did less than what a difficult situation required, and that we must face up to and deal with the consequences.
This analysis--as too that of the President and his administration, Old Media, and just about every other Infidel too unaware (how can one be unaware now over five years out from 9/11?) or too timid to admit it--fails to account for the role of Islam. It looks at the Global Jihad through the prism of its own belief system (or lack of one) and expects observant Muslims to think, vote, and act as Westerners would. This is naive and foolish, for the Religion of Peace is the defining factor in all calculations involving the Muslim world and our Global War of Self-Defense Against Allah, and it is diametrically opposed to the values and beliefs foundational to Western Civilization.

(A sad irony perpetuated by those who deny that we are engaged in a "clash of civilizations" is that Islam is fully exploiting to Allah's advantage the West's political, religious, legal, and moral weaknesses, but we do nothing to resist its advance. The West could utterly devastate any portion of the Ummah it wishes (in whole or in part), but jihadists, their sympathetic co-religionists, and their Useful Idiots in the West have intimidated and deceived us so thoroughly that one cannot even question Islam. So craven are we that our own politicians not only defend or deny in the public discourse the tyranny of Allah, they introduce legislation to impose it upon us.)

The fundamental issue on which American success in Iraq has always hinged is to what degree the Iraqi people embrace the will of Allah. The more devout, faithful, and religious its people, the less likely will it be that Iraq will achieve true Liberty and equality of rights for all its citizens (including religious minorities and women), and the greater the likelihood that its people will continue to contribute to jihad against us.

In effect, America and its friends are making our success in Iraq dependent upon the apostasy of its Muslims.

Jihad in Iraq is not the result of innate, unavoidable genetic factors, nor is it due to matters of nationalism. It is due to the belief system of too significant a percentage of the Muslim people: Islam.

Democracy means that the people vote for the government they desire. Iraqis voted for a tall glass of Shari'ah with a Shia twist (that's why fourteen year-old Christian boys are being beheaded at work). Clearly, democracy is working in Iraq, just not the way Infidels would prefer it.

How can we expect the Iraqi people vote for leaders who will work "in good faith" toward "reconciliation," when the nation is nearly entirely Muslim (non-Muslims are suffering more and more since Saddam was removed), and its people are divided along the ancient, historical, and religious lines of Shia versus Sunni? War, persecution, and humiliation is what they do to each other.

Neither can one be surprised when a nation that is majority-Shia vote for...a Shia! And since Allah and his apostle require that every able-bodied Muslim engage in jihad against the Infidel and Apostate to make the world Islam, it should not come as a shock that these Shia would be militia-friendly.

Iraq's decision at the polls is only "very bad" if you are non-Muslim or Sunni. For those who voted, they got what they wanted (or at least a step closer toward it, perhaps the establishment of an Iran/Shia-based caliphate).

Neither did the Iraqis "do less than what a difficult situation required," they did what the law allowed and their ideology demanded. They used the Western imposition of the democratic process to advance the establishment of Shari'ah, the rule of Islam.

Now the West must "face up to and deal with the consequences" of our failure to understand and address the source and sustenance of Muslim terrorism: the will of Allah and his messenger. It is they who require the fighting against, subduing and humiliating, and killing of non-Muslims to make the world Islam.
Killing two fallacies with one poll

From Power Line:
Thomas asks Secretary Rice what evidence she has that the denizens of such an independent state would give up the dream that actually seems to drive them -- the dream of eliminating Israel:
SECRETARY RICE: Well, you can look at any opinion poll in the Palestinian territories and 70 percent of the people will say they're perfectly ready to live side by side with Israel because they just want to live in peace. And when it comes right down to it, yeah, there are plenty of extremists in the Palestinian territories who are not going to be easily dealt with. They have to be dealt with — Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in the Palestinian territories — they're terrorists and they have to be dealt with as terrorists.

But the great majority of Palestinian people — this is — I've been with these people. The great majority of people, they just want a better life. This is an educated population. I mean, they have a kind of culture of education and a culture of civil society. I just don't believe mothers want their children to grow up to be suicide bombers. I think the mothers want their children to grow up to go to university. And if you can create the right conditions, that's what people are going to do.

QUESTION: Do you think this or do you know this?

SECRETARY RICE: Well, I think I know it.

QUESTION: You think you know it?

SECRETARY RICE: I think I know it.
I'd like to see the poll to which Secretary Rice is referring. I don't recall one with results as described. But what are we to make of the broader issue? I read Secretary Rice's responses as suggesting that she knows, or thinks she knows, she's peddling tripe.
That poll would be their last election, in which the "Palestianians" voted for a terrorist group sworn to Israel's destruction.

This fact kills two falsehoods: First, that "Palestinians" are a noble people desiring freedom and peaceful coexistence with Israel, and second, that democracy will benefit the Infidel when instituted among a people enslaved by Islam.
Christian Liberty versus the tyranny of Allah



Some cultures are better than others.
A variant on a decidedly tragic historical theme



Sticks and stones may break my bones,
and sometimes words are a very clear indicator of what is to come.
A little historical irony



The more things change, the more they stay the same.

The undeniable, inexplicable, and stubborn ignorance of Hugh Hewitt

On matters of traditional national politics, there are few commentators as knowledgeable or perceptive as Hugh Hewitt.

On the subject of Islam and the threat it poses to free people everywhere, there are few more (undoubtedly innocently) obtuse.

The Moderate Muslim

There are Apostate Muslims, but Islam itself is not moderate. That's a variation of the insightful and succinct, "There are moderate Muslims, but Islam itself is not moderate."

Besides the untenable "Islamism has nothing to do with Islam," Hugh persists in attempting to (mis-) define the Religion of Peace in terms of those Muslims who (allegedly) reject forever offensive warfare against the Infidel and Apostate to make the world Islam.

"Alleged," for how can one have Islam without Allah and his Qur'an? Without Mohammed words and deeds? A true Muslim must obey Allah and his apostle who command the fighting against, subduing and humiliating, and killing of non-Muslims.

Establishing the Facts

Following are questions to which Hugh has never provided me the answers. These are questions he must avoid answering, for--as he delights in demonstrating with hostile callers to his radio program--establishing basic facts lead inextricably to certain conclusions. To avoid admitting these truths Hugh seems willing to sacrifice any amount of his intellectual integrity and moral courage:

1. Is Qur'an the perfect word of Allah?

2. Are all Allah's commands (that he has not abrogated) in Qur'an to be obeyed by faithful Muslims?

3. Are the words and example of Mohammed (Sira and Hadith) to be emulated by faithful Muslims (as their resources and circumstances allow)?

4. Does Allah command the faithful Muslim to "...kill the unbelievers wherever you find them"?

Does Allah require the faithful Muslim to "Fight...until all religion is for Allah"?

Did Allah command faithful Muslims to "Fight...the People of the Book until they feel themselves subdued and pay the jizya"?

5. Did Mohammed state that he had been ordered to "fight until all confess there is no god but Allah and Mohammed is his prophet"?

6. Did Mohammed say that no work is like Jihad?

7. Did Mohammed say that he had "been made victorious with terror"?

8. Did Mohammed say, "If anyone changes his religion, then kill him"?

9. Did Mohammed indulge his "marital impulse" with a nine-year-old child (marrying her when she was six and he in his fifties)?

Did he not attribute his raping this child (his favorite wife) to Allah by saying, "If this is from Allah, then it must happen"?

10. Have Muslims warred against humanity to make the world Islam (again, as their resources and will have allowed) for nearly fourteen centuries?

The answer to all these questions is, regrettably and tragically, "yes." These are unalterable facts of history, despite what deceitful apologists and gullible, ignorant infidels and apostates might say to the contrary.

Denying that the violence of Qur'an, Sira, and Hadith inspire and sustain jihad is like denying Hitler's ideology motivated the Holocaust. It is absurd.

That "Tiny Minority of Extremists"

You keep using that word ("tiny"). I do not think it means what you think it means.

How blind (or craven) must one be at this stage of the West's submission to Islam's bloody intimidation not only to deny still the commands of Allah and his false prophet for offensive warfare against the Infidel, but to persist in the absurdity that the jihad ideology receives support from only a "tiny minority of extremists"?

It is becoming increasingly difficult to avoid noticing that wherever Muslims protest in any significant (or insignificant) numbers, they do not protest against the "hijackers" of their religion, nor do they protest in favor of Liberty or human rights. Rather, they protest in favor of beheading, burning, and burying anyone who dares to point out Allah and his prophet from Hell's delight in evil, even when that involves merely citing their own "sacred" texts.

Recent opinion polls in the UK show growing support among Muslims for violence against their hosts (some even carry it out!). All over Europe, "youths" burn and break (and worse) Infidel personal property (and persons). In Pakistan, not only do you have nearly total (90%) lust for Infidel and Apostate blood, but you've got the government's intelligence agency aiding the jihadists! Indonesia's population is admitting more openly its support for holy war. One election after another within Dar al-Islam brings to its "perverters" of the "great world religion" ever-increasing political power. What of the Philippines? Somalia? Nigeria? Sudan?

Even if only one percent of the world's Muslims would actually engage in jihad (one percent of 1.2 billion is 12 million!), a majority of the ummah still support it financially, logistically, emotionally, and spiritually. And nearly all support the subjugation of the Infidel under Shari'ah.

They must, because their god and prophet require it.

In Conclusion

The challenge facing the West is not in strength of arms, but in strength of will and clarity of mind. If we lack the will or ability to admit against what we fight--the god that commands, "...kill the unbelievers wherever you find them"--how can we possibly deal effectively with its ideology of hate and the threat posed by its adherents?

Wednesday, November 08, 2006

Pim Fortuyn's Prediction

Whatever your thoughts on the elections yesterday in the US, always remember that things can go very differently. Long one of my favorite video clips of Pim Fortuyn, I was surprised to find it referenced in an article linked on TROP today. The article, "Sleepwalking Dutch Lulled Into Complacency On Terrorism", written by Beila Rabinowitz of MilitantIslamMonitor.org, deals mainly with the current political situation as seen through the lens of past assaults and threats, does mention the predictions of both Theo van Gogh and Pim Fortuyn.

Theo van Gogh had said before Pim's assasination:

"I suspect Fortuyn will be the first in a line of politically incorrect heretics to be eliminated. This is what our multicultural society has brought us: a climate of intimidation in which all sorts of goat fuckers can issue their threats freely."

(goat fuckers being a joke name used by van Gogh for the Muslims in his country)

Also there is the rather spotty translation of Fortuyn's comments from an appearance on the Dutch TV program "Jensen" just a few months before he was murdered, but it's no less spotty than my own translation:

Presciently, Fortuyn's predicted his assassination. In an interview which can be seen on You Tube [Pim Fortuyn Als mij wat gebeurt, "If something happens to me] the prime ministerial candidate declared:

"If you see what I get in the mail from time to time - I mean all the threats - it wouldn't make you cheerful. And the Dutch government - I find that a bloody shame, [it] helps to create a climate, the demonizing of me as a person. And if something should happens to me soon, and I am happy you are giving me the opportunity - and if something happens to me soon, then they are partly responsible. And they cant remove their hands from responsibility and say but it wasn't me who committed the attack. You have created the climate. And that has to stop."

Not included in this is the wry joke that Fortuyn makes asking if anyone has anymore pies to throw, referring to the infamous incident (which can also be seen on YouTube in a Dutch news report here) in which he was pied by leftist radicals with pies containing urine and feces, a comment that shows his immense charm and wit even without translation.



I am just happy to see this linked, as the user who posted this video is one of my favorite Fortuynist cohorts (YouTube user "problemsolver71"). I am also very happy that after our initial posting of Pim videos there has been a veritable avalanche on YouTube of Pim videos by others still loyal to him. But THIS video should be seen and understood in all of the West, for after all, Pim was not murdered by a Muslim fanatic or group of them as was van Gogh. He was murdered by Volkert van der Graaf, a far-leftist, who admitting to murdering Fortuyn to "protect the Muslims". Fortuyn was also quite aware of the possibility of his assasination, and spoke of this several times in the months before his death, his accusations left to us from beyond the grave. As his predictions proved, a politically correct media that creates a climate that hostile to those succeeding in confronting the threats we face is a danger to us all, wherever in the West we happen to be.