The Agenda of Islam - A War Between Civilizations

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

[dennisw]

The Agenda of Islam - A War Between Civilizations

Professor Moshe Sharon- Wednesday 24th Dec 2003

The war has started a long time ago between two civilizations - between the civilization based on the Bible and between the civilization based on the Koran. And this must be clear.

There is no fundamental Islam.
"Fundamentalism" is a word that came from the heart of the Christian religion. It means faith that goes by the word of the Bible. Fundamental Christianity, or going with the Bible, does not mean going around and killing people. There is no fundamental Islam. There is only Islam full stop. The question is how the Koran is interpreted.

All of a sudden we see that the greatest interpreters of Islam are politicians in the western world. They know better than all the speakers in the mosques, all those who deliver terrible sermons against anything that is either Christian or Jewish. These western politicians know that there is good Islam and bad Islam. They know even how to differentiate between the two, except that none of them know how to read a word of Arabic.

The Language of Islam
You see, so much is covered by politically correct language that, in fact, the truth has been lost. For example, when we speak about Islam in the west, we try to use our own language and terminology. We speak about Islam in terms of democracy and fundamentalism, in terms of parliamentarism and all kinds of terms, which we take from our own dictionary. One of my professors and one of the greatest orientalists in the world says that doing this is like a cricket reporter describing a cricket game in baseball terms. We cannot use for one culture or civilization the language of another. For Islam, you've got to use the language of Islam.

Driving Principles of Islam
Let me explain the principles that are driving the religion of Islam. Of course, every Moslem has to acknowledge the fact that there is only one God.
But it's not enough to say that there is only one God. A Moslem has to acknowledge the fact that there is one God and Mohammed is his prophet. These are the fundamentals of the religion that without them, one cannot be a Moslem.
But beyond that, Islam is a civilization. It is a religion that gave first and foremost a wide and unique legal system that engulfs the individual, society and nations with rules of behaviour. If you are Moslem, you have to behave according to the rules of Islam which are set down in the Koran and which are very different than the teachings of the Bible.

The Bible
Let me explain the difference.
The Bible is the creation of the spirit of a nation over a very, very long period, if we talk from the point of view of the scholar, and let me remain scholarly. But there is one thing that is important in the Bible. It leads to salvation. It leads to salvation in two ways.

In Judaism, it leads to national salvation - not just a nation that wants to have a state, but a nation that wants to serve God. That's the idea behind the Hebrew text of the Bible.

The New Testament that took the Hebrew Bible moves us toward personal salvation. So we have got these two kinds of salvation, which, from time to time, meet each other.

But the key word is salvation. Personal salvation means that each individual is looked after by God, Himself, who leads a person through His word to salvation. This is the idea in the Bible, whether we are talking about the Old or the New Testament. All of the laws in the Bible, even to the minutest ones, are, in fact directed toward this fact of salvation.

Secondly, there is another point in the Bible, which is highly important. This is the idea that man was created in the image of God. Therefore, you don't just walk around and obliterate the image of God. Many people, of course, used Biblical rules and turned them upside down. History has seen a lot of massacres in the name of God and in the name of Jesus. But as religions, both Judaism and Christianity in their fundamentals speak about honouring the image of God and the hope of salvation. These are the two basic fundamentals.

The Essence of Islam
Now let's move to the essence of Islam. Islam was born with the idea that it should rule the world.

Let's look, then, at the difference between these three religions. Judaism speaks about national salvation - namely that at the end of the story, when the world becomes a better place, Israel will be in its own land, ruled by its own king and serving God. Christianity speaks about the idea that every single person in the world can be saved from his sings, while Islam speaks about ruling the world. I can quote here in Arabic, but there is no point in quoting Arabic, so let me quote a verse in English. "Allah sent Mohammed with the true religion so that it should rule over all the religions."

The idea, then, is not that the whole world would become a Moslem world at this time, but that the whole world would be subdued under the rule of Islam.
When the Islamic empire was established in 634 AD, within seven years - 640 - the core of the empire was created. The rules that were taken from the Koran and from the tradition that was ascribed to the prophet Mohammed, were translated into a real legal system. Jews and Christians could live under Islam provided they paid poll tax and accepted Islamic superiority. Of course, they had to be humiliated. And Jews and Christians living under Islam are humiliated to this very day.

Mohammed Held That All the Biblical Prophets Were Moslems
Mohammed did accept the existence of all the Biblical prophets before him. However he also said that all these prophets were Moslems. Abraham was a Moslem. In fact, Adam himself was the first Moslem. Isaac and Jacob and David and Solomon and Moses and Jesus were all Moslems, and all of them had writings similar to the Koran. Therefore, world history is Islamic history because all the heroes of history were Moslems.

Furthermore, Moslems accept the fact that each of these prophets brought with him some kind of a revelation. Moses, brought the Taurat, which is the Torah, and Jesus brought the Ingeel, which is the Evangelion or Gospel - namely the New Testament.

The Bible vs. the Koran
Why then is the Bible not similar to the Koran?

Mohammed explains that the Jews and Christians forged their books. Had they not been changed and forged, they would have been identical to the Koran. But because Christians and Jews do have some truth, Islam concedes that they cannot be completely destroyed by war [for now].

Nevertheless, the laws a very clear - Jews and Christians have no rights whatsoever to independent existence. They can live under Islamic rule provided they keep to the rules that Islam promulgates for them.

Islamic Rule and Jihad
What happens if Jews and Christians don't want to live under the rules of Islam? Then Islam has to fight them and this fighting is called Jihad. Jihad means war against those people who don't want to accept the Islamic superior rule. That's jihad. They may be Jews; they may be Christians; they may be Polytheists. But since we don't have too many Polytheists left, at least not in the Middle East - their war is against the Jews and Christians.

A few days ago, I received a pamphlet that was distributed in the world by bin Laden. He calls for jihad against America as the leader of the Christian world, not because America is the supporter of Israel, but because Americans are desecrating Arabia with their filthy feet. There are Americans in Arabia were no Christians should be. In this pamphlet there is not a single word about Israel. Only that Americans are desecrating the home of the prophet.

Two Houses
The Koran sees the world as divided into two - one part which has come under Islamic rule and one part which is supposed to come under Islamic rule in the future. There is a division of the world which is very clear. Every single person who starts studying Islam knows it. The world is described as Dar al-Islam (the house of Islam) - that's the place where Islam rules - and the other part which is called Dar al-Harb - the house of war. Not the "house of non-Muslims," but the "house of war." It is this house of war which as to be, at the end of time, conquered. The world will continue to be in the house of war until it comes under Islamic rule.
This is the norm. Why? Because Allah says it's so in the Koran. God has sent Mohammed with the true religion in order that the truth will overcome all other religions.

Islamic Law
Within the Islamic vision of this world, there are rules that govern the lives of the Moslems themselves, and these rules are very strict. In fundamentals, there are no differences between schools of law.

However, there are four streams of factions within Islam with differences between them concerning the minutiae of the laws. All over the Islamic world, countries have favored one or another of these schools of laws.
The strictest school of law is called Hanbali, mainly coming out of Saudi Arabia. There are no games there, no playing around with the meanings of words. If the Koran speaks about war, then it's war.

There are various perspectives in Islam with different interpretations over the centuries. There were good people that were very enlightened in Islam that tried to understand things differently. They even brought traditions from the mouth of the prophet that women and children should not be killed in war.
These more liberal streams do exist, but there is one thing that is very important for us to remember. The Hanbali school of law is extremely strict, and today this is the school that is behind most of the terrorist powers. Even if we talk about the existence of other schools of Islamic law, when we're talking about fighting against the Jews, or fighting against the Christian world led by America, it is the Hanbali school of law that is being followed.

Islam and Territory
This civilization created one very important, fundamental rule about territory. Any territory that comes under Islamic rule cannot be de-Islamized. Even if at one time or another, the [non-Moslem] enemy takes over the territory that was under Islamic rule, it is considered to be perpetually Islamic.
This is why whenever you hear about the Arab/Israeli conflict, you hear - territory, territory, territory. There are other aspects to the conflict, but territory is highly important.

The Christian civilization has not only been seen as a religious opponent, but as a dam stopping Islam from achieving its final goal for which it was created.
Islam was created to be the army of God, the army of Allah. Every single Moslem is a soldier in this army. Every single Moslem that dies in fighting for the spread of Islam is a shaheed (martyr) no matter how he dies, because - and this is very important - this is an eternal word between the two civilizations. It's not a war that stops. This was is there because it was created by Allah. Islam must be the ruler. This is a war that will not end.

Islam and Peace
Peace in Islam can exist only within the Islamic world; peace can only be between Moslem and Moslem.

With the non-Moslem world or non-Moslem opponents, there can be only one solution - a cease fire until Moslems can gain more power. It is an eternal war until the end of days. Peace can only come if the Islamic side wins.
The two civilizations can only have periods of cease-fires. And this idea of cease-fire is based on a very important historical precedent, which, incidentally, Yasser Arafat referred to when he spoke in Johannesburg after he signed the Oslo agreement with Israel.

Let me remind you that the document speaks of peace - you wouldn't believe that you are reading! You would think that you were reading some science fiction piece. I mean when you read it, you can't believe that this was signed by Israelis who are actually acquainted with Islamic policies and civilization.

A few weeks after the Oslo agreement was signed, Arafat went to Johannesburg, and in a mosque there he made a speech in which he apologized, saying, "Do you think I signed something with the Jews which is contrary to the rules of Islam?" (I have obtained a copy of Arafat's recorded speech so I heard it from his own mouth.) Arafat continued, "That's not so. I'm doing exactly what the prophet Mohammed did."

Whatever the prophet is supposed have done becomes a precedent. What Arafat was saying was, "Remember the story of Hodaybiya." The prophet had made an agreement there with the tribe of Kuraish for 10 years. But then he trained 10,000 soldiers and within two years marched on their city of Mecca. He, of course, found some kind of pretext.

Thus, in Islamic jurisdiction, it became a legal precedent which states that you are only allowed to make peace for a maximum of 10 years.
Secondly, at the first instance that you are able, you must renew the jihad [thus breaking the "peace" agreement].

In Israel, it has taken over 50 years in this country for our people to understand that they cannot speak about [permanent] peace with Moslems. It will take another 50 years for the western world to understand that they have got a state of war with the Islamic civilization that is virile and strong. This should be understood: When we talk about war and peace, we are not talking in Belgium, French, English, or German terms. We are talking about war and peace in Islamic terms.

Cease-fire as a Tactical Choice
What makes Islam accept cease-fire? Only one thing - when the enemy is too strong. It is a tactical choice.

Sometimes, he may have to agree to a cease-fire in the most humiliating conditions. It's allowed because Mohammed accepted a cease-fire under humiliating conditions. That's what Arafat said to them in Johannesburg.
When western policy makers hear these things, they answer, "What are you talking about? You are in the Middle Ages. You don't understand the mechanisms of politics."

Which mechanisms of politics? There are no mechanisms of politics where power is. And I want to tell you one thing - we haven't seen the end of it, because the minute a radical Moslem power has atomic, chemical or biological weapons, they will use it. I have no doubt about that.

Now, since we face war and we know that we cannot get more than an impermanent cease-fire, one has to ask himself what is the major component of an Israeli/Arab cease-fire. It is that the Islamic side is weak and your side is strong. The relations between Israel and the Arab world in the last 50 years since the establishment of our State has been based only on this idea, the deterrent power.

Wherever You Have Islam, You Will Have War
The reason that we have what we have in Yugoslavia and other places is because Islam succeeded into entering these countries. Wherever you have Islam, you will have war. It grows out of the attitude of Islamic civilization.

What are the poor people in the Philippines being killed for? What's happening between Pakistan and India?

Islamic Infiltration
Furthermore, there is another fact that must be remembered. The Islamic world has not only the attitude of open war, but there's also war by infiltration.
One of the things which the western world is not paying enough attention to is the tremendous growth of Islamic power in the western world. What happened in America and the Twin Towers is not something that came from the outside. And if America doesn't wake up, one day the Americans will find themselves in a chemical war and most likely in an atomic war - inside the U.S.

End of Days
It is highly important to understand how a civilization sees the end of days. In Christianity and in Judaism, we know exactly what is the vision of the end of days.
In Judaism, it is going to be as in Isaiah - peace between nations, not just one nation, but between all nations. People will not have any more need for weapons and nature will be changed - a beautiful end of days and the kingdom of God on earth.

Christianity goes as far as Revelation to see a day that Satan himself is obliterated. There are no more powers of evil. That's the vision.

I'm speaking now as a historian. I try to understand how Islam sees the end of days. In the end of days, Islam sees a world that is totally Moslem, completely Moslem under the rule of Islam. Complete and final victory.

Christians will not exist, because according to many Islamic traditions, the Moslems who are in hell will have to be replaced by somebody and they'll be replaced by the Christians.

The Jews will no longer exist, because before the coming of the end of days, there is going to be a war against the Jews where all Jews should be killed. I'm quoting now from the heart of Islamic tradition, from the books that are read by every child in school. They Jews will all be killed. They'll be running away and they'll be hiding behind trees and rocks, and on that day Allah will give mouths to the rocks and trees and they will say, "Oh Moslem come here, there is a Jew behind me, kill him." Without this, the end of days cannot come. This is a fundamental of Islam.

Is There a Possibility to End This Dance of War?
The question which we in Israel are asking ourselves is what will happen to our country? Is there a possibility to end this dance of war?

The answer is, "No. Not in the foreseeable future." What we can do is reach a situation where for a few years we may have relative quiet.

But for Islam, the establishment of the state of Israel was a reverse of Islamic history. First, Islamic territory was taken away from Islam by Jews. You know by now that this can never be accepted, not even one meter. So everyone who thinks Tel Aviv is safe is making a grave mistake. Territory, which at one time was dominated by Islamic rule, now has become non-Moslem. Non-Moslems are independent of Islamic rule; Jews have created their own independent state. It is anathema.

And (this is the worse) Israel, a non-Moslem state, is ruling over Moslems. It is unthinkable that non-Moslems should rule over Moslems.

I believe that Western civilization should hold together and support each other. Whether this will happen or not, I don't know. Israel finds itself on the front lines of this war. It needs the help of its sister civilization. It needs the help of America and Europe. It needs the help of the Christian world. One thing I am sure about, this help can be given by individual Christians who see this as the road to salvation.

[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.