The Agenda of Islam - A War Between Civilizations

betar ^ | Wednesday 24th Dec 2003 | Professor Moshe Sharon

[Clintonfatigued]

Thanks for the history lesson. I feel that I've been educated and am now better-informed.

[Luis Gonzalez]

The number is 150 million, not 150 million million.

There are roughly 1 billion MusLims in the world, so even the 150 million figure (I've been invited to and attended several of his Pipe's on the subject) is a small fraction of the total Muslims of the world, if you are insinuating that defeating the extremist minority is not sufficient to end the threat, then you are advocating genocide, and you are as inherently evil as the most evil Muslim extremist.

"Islam is death for Christians and Jews. It is spelled out in the Koran."

Oh, is it?

"...And nearest among them in love to the believers wilt thou find those who say: 'We are Christians': because among these are men devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world. And they are not arrogant." (The Holy Qur'an 5:82)

Muslim extremists rely on the ignorance of the people of backward countries, they actually fight any attempt at educating the masses because an educated populace, able to read the Holy Qur'an, would unveil their lies.

Equally ignorant, are those on our side of the issue, who believe the parsed bits of the Qur'an passed about on the Internet.

The Holy Qur'an does instruct Muslims to fight anyone who tries to oppress them for being Muslims.

Ignorance is a Muslim extremist strongest ally, both in Muslim countries, and here.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Great Britain is socialist, as are most European countries...there goes your theory.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"I wonder what you think the major difference is between Mein Kampf and the Koran."

You've obviously have read neither, thus your ignorance.

"Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot...Castro, Mugabe..."

You can't tell the difference between extremism and mainstream, can you?

Let's do things your way...

Christianity is an evil religion, it promotes genocide (read Leviticus) promotes hatred (proven by the teachings of Christian Identity, The World church of The Creator, and The Ku Klux Klan) and practices child abuse as witnessed by the yearly murder of one million unborn.

"Bin Laden is no more critical to jihad..."

Difference...

The Pope sets the Catholic Church's position on abortion, bin Laden has no authority to enact a jihad.

As I said, ignorance is a Muslim extremist's best ally.

[tubavil]

150 million is correct - my typo.

That "small fraction" is 12.5% of the muslim population - again using Pipes' numbers. 150,000,000 muslim terrrorists and muslim terrorism supporters is a HUGE problem.

I see you are part of the "you're advocating genocide" crowd. Funny, I haven't debated a single muslim extremist who hasn't used that approach.

islam is a satanic cult of death and destruction.

The 'secret' is out.

[PattonReincarnated]

>> Islam has no agenda.

Get real. Islam has an agenda - it's called evil. Mohammad was evil, and anyone who is Islamic is infected with Mohammad's evil ways. I see two alternatives to any Muslin, convert to real religion, or die.

[F16Fighter]

"So, the only safety will be when the last Muslim is dead?"

Theoretically speaking? Yes.

Unless the very last Muslim happens to renounce the tenets of the Koran before turning out the lights.

[ml/nj]

you are advocating genocide, and you are as inherently evil as the most evil Muslim extremist.

Nonsense.

We were not engaged in "genocide" when we killed lots of Germans and Japanese 60 years ago. We were following the advice of the Talmud which says: If someone comes to kill you, kill him first.

The Jews were never a threat to the Nazis when Hitler wrote Mein Kampf. They weren't coming to kill Germans. And we Americans weren't coming to kill Muslims. But the Germans and the Muslims killed indiscriminately anyway. That's genocide. I hope we won't be as stupid as the Jews of Europe were, but with our current leadership it looks as if we might.

ML/NJ

[F16Fighter]

"'Islam' has no agenda..."

So absurd a statement that it's scary. But then again, considering your agendae, I'm not surprised.

[gobucks]

FWIW, the general parable is more associated with the idea of "kill the messenger", but not really, b/c it has to do with how folks ignore warnings in general, on a psychological level.

Christ, btw, was the ultimate laocoon ... he provided warnings, but today as then, too few listen.

All this reality of history notwithstanding, I choose to attempt anyway to forestall the erosion of American Liberty. I DO HOPE INDEED, that I am just a silly chicken little, however.

[ml/nj]

Some much ignorance, so little time ... Christianity is an evil religion, it promotes genocide (read Leviticus)

You mean like viahavta larayach chomcha? That's "Love your neighbor as yourself" at 19:18. That's pretty typical of the laws that deal with relationships with other persons that are found in Leviticus. (Be kind to the stranger because you were once strangers in the land of Egypt. I might be misquoting, but that's the idea.) I'm pretty surprised that you chose Leviticus, because I cannot now think of parts that might be described as promoting geneocide. Certainly there is some of that that can be found in a literal reading of some of the other books. But that's not how Christians and Jews live. You cannot easily find websites that promote themselves as Christian or Jewish (or any real religion) that advocate indiscriminate killing of non-coreligionists. But it's pretty hard not to come across Islasmic websites that advocate and/or glorify violence.

ML/NJ

[SauronOfMordor]

"Islam" has no agenda, extremist Islamic fundamentalists do, the first rule of war is to identify your enemy...thus far, you're failing miserably.

"Islam" does indeed have an agenda -- it's spelled out in the Qu'ran (and yes I have read it myself).

For "extremist Islamic fundamentalists" substitute "believing Muslims". Yes, there are people whose official religion is Islam, who are secular in outlook. These people may be peaceful, but it's purely because they are not really Muslim. This does not mean that they (or their children) won't experience a reawakening of Islamism.

The bottom line is that Islam, itself, is incompatible with Western civilization

[Kevin Curry]

Don't insult my intelligence.

As is true regarding most issues, Luis, you don't have a clue about the Islamic agenda beyond some vague community college-quality sense of it.

Islam has a definite and clear agenda. It would never have survived to control the territory and souls that it presently controls or formerly controlled for more than 1000 years if it lacked a definite and clear agenda. The extent to which each Muslim identifies with and supports the agenda is an open question, but the agenda itself is very clear.

"If we look at the sources and foundations of modern ways of living, it becomes clear that the whole world is steeped in Jahiliyya (pagan ignorance of divine guidance), and all the marvellous material comforts and high-level inventions do not diminish this Ignorance. This Jahiliyya is based on rebellion against God's sovereignty on earth: It transfers to man one of the greatest attributes of God, namely sovereignty, and makes some men lords over others. It is now not in that simple and primitive form of the ancient Jahiliyya, but takes the form of claiming that the right to create values, to legislate rules of collective behavior, and to choose any way of life rests with men, without regard to what God has prescribed. The result of this rebellion against the authority of God is the oppression of His creatures...

"The Islamic civilization can take various forms in its material and organizational structure, but the principles and values on which it is based are eternal and unchangeable. These are: the worship of God alone, the foundation of human relationships on the belief in the Unity of God, the supremacy of the humanity of man over material things, the development of human values and the control of animalistic desires, respect for the family, the assumption of the vice-regency of God on earth according to His guidance and instruction, and in all affairs of this vice-regency, the rule of God's law [al-Shari'a] and the way of life prescribed by Him . . .

"In the scale of God, the true weight is the weight of faith; in God's market the only commodity in demand is the commodity of faith. The highest form of triumph is the victory of soul over matter, the victory of belief over pain, and the victory of faith over persecution."- Sayyid Qtab

[US admirer]

Contrary to the protestations of Mr. Gonzales, Islam does have an agenda, and a brutal, ugly, malignant one at that. It is the incarnation of evil.

There will come a day when tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of Americans will be slaughtered in the name of Allah, in their homeland by Muslim "martyrs" who would simply follow the directives of the Koran.

Within hours, the US will respond with lethal retaliation and preemptive action to preclude a recurrence.

That response will annihilate millions of Muslims, many of whom are radical zealots who would rejoice at an encore of mass American causalities, along with some Muslims who have yet to be indoctrinated with hate and yet other "liberal" Muslims who refuse to accept the brutal directives prescribed in the Koran.

The US will be required to sacrifice the lives of such "good" Muslims, for the sake of the survival of the entire non-Muslim world.

That day will mark the suspension, but not the end of, many of our most cherished democracratic ideals. The alternative however will be the end of mankind.

[SauronOfMordor]

In order for your ridiculous assertion to work, you would have to convince me that all Germans pursued absolute genocide, a weak argument in light of the fact that they were busy killing Germans right along.

Not all Germans believed in genocide. All Nazis did

Not all people living in countries where Islam is the majority religion believe in the duty to kill to promote Islam. All PRACTICING, DEVOUT Muslims do. There's a difference between country-of-origin and ideology. Islam is an ideology

The way we dealt with National Socialism was to conquer and occupy the territory of the believers, and impose strict laws that no positive mention of Naziism was ever to be made, nor would children's indoctrination in Nazi ideology be tolerated. That instead the children of the Nazis were to be taught that Naziism was fundamentally evil. After a generation or two of occupation, Naziism as a threat was eradicated.

[SauronOfMordor]

Great Britain is socialist, as are most European countries...there goes your theory.

Britain is a welfare state that is going in the direction of socialism. Since there are still privately-owned industries, it is not socialist, per Marx's definition of socialism

[YankeeReb]

Actually, sealing the borders and kicking out the bad guys is supported by the vast majority of the American electorate, and would therefore doubtlessly bring many more votes to any President with guts enough to make the move.

The problem is that while the majority of the electorate would support such an effort the monied interests would not, and since without money it's impossible to get elected, you see where we're at. Bush and the GOP will talk a better game then the dems about border security, thus insuring 4 more years, but when it comes down to it, Bush is just a few shades better than his leftist/liberal opponents.

For whatever their individual reasons the elitists have decided that we're to have open borders, so no matter who gets in, that's just what we'll have.

[Gritty]

This guy puts it all together.

This should be required reading nation-wide by every voter, and especially all the candidates.

[papertyger]

My, aren't you a master of straw-man kung fu? Okay, lets take your nonsense apart in order of appearance, though it is quite apparent "the lady doth protest too much."

The German analogy is quite appropriate in that there were Germans of all different convictions, to be sure. Nevertheless, the "leader of a movement" to borrow your hair splitting phrase, had the required mass of followers with which to command nearly every resource in the country, and rule with absolute impunity. Those that didn't support him were not in active opposition for the most part. Those that did oppose him were ineffectual. So while you can dispute the sky is blue, because somedays its grey, don't expect thinking people to take your gnat-gagging seriously.

Appropriate indeed.

Next, Islam can be inherently evil without all Muslims being evil. That was your assertion: not mine. The former is an ideology, the latter are individuals. Christianity teaches all men are inherently evil. Does that mean it teaches men are incapable of anything but evil? Again, the horns of your dilema are not nearly as imposing as you'd like to make them out to be.

As for Turkey, and other Moslem countries that "are not out causing problems," name one isn't under military/authoritarian rule, and also possesses an overwhelming majority of Moslem citizens. Where ever Moslems reach a mass large enough to affect their own security, the chauvinism inherent to their religious doctrines becomes evident.

I think all Americans, with their melting-pot sensibilities, would love for you to produce these millions of Moslems vehemently condemning Moslem extremism, and terrorism. Sadly, you are fantasizing out of a combination of token gestures on their part, and desperate desire on your part.

Your really are going to have to explain the logical somersaults you use to arrive at the notion "that all Germans pursued absolute genocide" is required to prove the German state, as a world power, actively pursued the policy. It's a matter of history. Well recorded history at that. If you are capable of ignoring that fact, you're in the same league as holocaust deniers. You might as well claim every American has to be wealthy before we can claim to enjoy a high standard of living.

At this point I have to wonder if you're running a fever. That's one impressive plan for conquest those radical, fundimentalist, Islamists are executing. "Fool your enemies into raising their guard whenever they encounter anybody that might be you." "Blind them into looking over their shoulder when you're trying to sneak up behind them."

Yup, you're right. I fallen for it hook, line, and sinker. Those blinders are firmly in place.

Um...you really are a very talented pettifogger. I specifically note a consensus, rather than a conspiracy, and you accuse me of...conspiracy thinking. Touche'! Banana Republican isn't just a cute turn of phrase; it's a way of life, huh?

Did you even read the article? Islam is always peaceful when it can't win. You're right. We aren't fighting a conventional government in a conventional war, but do ya think maybe...just maybe...there might be the tiniest itty bitty similarity to, oh, say-----Communism? That wasn't conventional either. Are you actually going to try to say it wasn't a war?

I like how Daniel Pipes put it; declaring a war on terrorism in response to 911 is like declaring a war on sneak-attacks in response to Pearl Harbor. Of course Pipes and the likes of Bernard Lewis are ignorant, right? Would you mind posting your CV so we can fully appreciate your analysis and identification of the enemy?

[risk]

You may want to believe in absolutes, go right ahead.

I have but one belief: that my people have a right to survive in freedom. And yes, this is an absolute belief. The slightest threat to that survival is something I am willing to crush like a cockroach. And I strongly deplore your urgent campaign to persuade us otherwise. I might remind you that you are a newcomer to this land. You are here reaping the benefits of sacrifice and zealous blows to the enemies of freedom dealt by my people for more than 350 years. You urge me to restrain the frevor of my extremist position, yet every day you live out the American dream created by that very passion. We are not "peaceful" people. We are filled with wrath and brimstone. Don't expect anything else from us! If you want gentility, try the French Riviera.

Luis, I have a new name for you: Ganelon:

During his final battle against militant Islamic hordes at Roncesvalles, traitor Ganelon delayed Charlemagne's relief force by telling the Frankish king that Roland was not blowing his horn to call for help, he was out hunting.

Oh I know your whole frame of logic. You think that if we do end up fighting a billion people because we mishandle our diplomatic and humanistic obligation to avoid offending their religious sensibilities, then we may indeed have a global war on our hands. Might we then be up against genocidal rage? Luis, I must remind you of the Alamo. Every American patriot knows the story. And deep in our hearts we know that someday we must face a similar challenge: die for what we believe, facing down impossible odds, to make a statement. If a billion Muslims or if four billion decide they want to end our hold on freedom and kill us all, I'll simply whisper, "Remeber the Alamo."

Earlier you inferred that some group was manipulating me into concluding that Islam was a death cult, saying "You understand that which you have been led to understand by people with agendas."

I'm choosing to confront you on this thread because it is a clearly Jewish professor outlining his assessment of the Islamic threat. I can guess that you either meant that Jews were manipulating my point of view, or that Islamic extremists were cajoling me into global conflict with their religion, or both. In the second case, it is true. On 9/11, I was enticed into a global war against Islamism, that is Islamic extremism. But it is also true that I have looked to Jewish people for help in understanding the problem. I see them as my brothers in arms in the global fight for liberal democracy. Unlike Patrick Buchanan's suggestion in an article you demanded that I read, I do not see a legitimate cause in the Palestinian Intefadah. Pleas for a right of return some like so much reconquista to me. So I accept the militant Jewish assertion of an absolute right -- by fiat of force -- to hold Israel and either pacify their unruly guests or expel them, failing that. Patrick Buchanan is well known as an anti-Semite, and has on several ocasions expressed sympathy and admiration of Adolf Hitler. Example:

In a 1977 column, Buchanan said that despite Hitler's anti-Semitic and genocidal tendencies, he was "an individual of great courage...Hitler's success was not based on his extraordinary gifts alone. His genius was an intuitive sense of the mushiness, the character flaws, the weakness masquerading as morality that was in the hearts of the statesmen who stood in his path." (The Guardian, 1/14/92)

Indeed, those who question Israel's absolute right to exist in peace -- at any cost -- ought to all be identified clearly for the anti-semites they are. Why? Because a free people has a right to exist at all cost. Likewise, America has a right to exist at all cost. And despite the softer, gentler image you see displayed in the officialdom of this nation today, we still believe that as a people.

"Islam" has no agenda, extremist Islamic fundamentalists do, the first rule of war is to identify your enemy...thus far, you're failing miserably.

On the contrary. Your argument is simple: a billion Muslim people do not hate me or wish to convert me to their devout faith; rather a small percentage of them do. As is the stated argument of my duly elected political leaders, we have no quarrel with this lion's share of the umma, or Allah's people. And to this I will say I agree. I do not have a quarrel with them directly. But what is their responsibility in the matter? Edmund Burke said that evil triumphs when good men do nothing. And I will have to say that the silence of "good" Muslims has been deafening. On the other hand, there have been a brave few who have been willing to raise a faint cry of warning to the west, such as Mansoor Ijaz. Most are too terrified to utter a sound, however.

As a nation, I agree with President Bush and Colin Powell's diplomatic stance. I am in complete agreement with their positioning of this global war on terrorism as one between the forces of good and the forces of extremism. This is exactly what my nation should be doing. I, on the other hand, am free to interpret events in the quiet of my own home. I can look out across the planet and see things in a different light. And I am not constrained by the international protocols of diplomacy when I conclude that Islam in its current form is my enemy.  Will there be a "reform" that transitions this belief system toward something more humane? Why would that happen? I'll suggest an answer: it will only happen when the zealots are all dead, or when the moderates conclude that they must choose sides and reform themselves. I am free to come to this conclusion, and I have. It is a worst case scenario, but when the survival of one's people is at stake, one must consider the extreme possibilities.

Earlier you asked, Do you not agree that their goal is to initiate a world wide war between religions?"

Yes, and what of it? Luis, you cannot undeclare war that has been declared by your enemies. You can try, but as Neville Chamberlain learned, it simply does not work. You said in an earlier post:

I could parse the Old Testament, and make it appear to people who are not acquainted with Christianity, that Christians are every bit as evil and violent, but we know that we are not, so we can easily deflect the arguments. We are not versed in the Qur'an, and what we don't realize, is that those parsed bits that we read are part of a bigger story, most of them instructing Muslims to fight against anyone who wishes to suppress their practice of Islam, or to repel invaders.

I simply reject this comment outright. Christianity has undergone a series of reformations. Western civilization has greatly benefited from its close ties to Judeo-Christian values. The results speak for themselves. Do not engage in cultural relativistic polemics with me. I have absolutely no use for such abnegation of my culture.

I doubt I have persuaded you one iota, Luis. By now you've had two years to ponder the implications of 9/11 and what it meant to the future of the human race. You've chosen to remain on the sidelines. That is acceptable by our laws and by our commitment to democracy. We do not want people fighting with us who can be so objective anyway. You and your family can sit back and enjoy the sacrifice of my people. We are proud to offer you this service.

What is more, I am proud to stand with Jews whom my parents' generation saved from utter annihilation by this same sort of appeasement. Neither they nor I should ever be asked to be gentle on those who promise us death, and neither should we be asked to avoid offending those who can't make up their minds -- including you.