That is why brave Chechen "freedom" fighters talked (in breaks between conquering hospitals and hunting for slaves in neighboring territories) about "liberation of whole Russia". That is why Muslims also must "liberate" Serbia, Greece, Bulgaria, Armenia, Georgia, Spain and India.
Which "Christian world"? The same one which is gaving help to Muslims against Serbs and cheered Islamists in Chechnya? And where was the Israel when Serbs where under attack?
See for yourself on Ask the Imam.com
Ignorant horsefeathers. The school of Hanbal is one of four Muslim legal schools and is literalist. It is not all of Islam. Ibn Tayymia is a teacher of us-them bigotry against anyone who is not a literalist. And is not all of Islam (is not, e.g. Al Ghazali or Ibn Rushd). It is as stupid as saying Pat Robertson wrote New World Order and some 19th century papal encyclicals denounced them, therefore all Christians believe Masons are a world-ruling demonic conspiracy. It is connect the dots straw man reasoning, not reality. Islam is an affair of continents and centuries, of hundreds of millions of varied human beings and hundreds of states. It is not book, let alone a cartoon.
But wait, I thought there was no such thing as a radical Muslim or Muslim fundamentalism. There is just Islam, right? So any Muslim power with the bomb will use it immediately, right? So Pakistan has already nuked us, right? No?
Then the adjective "radical" is needed. Because there is a difference between all Muslims and Muslim radicals, between all Muslims and Muslim fundamentalists, between all Muslims and the sects of Tayymia and Hanbal. He knows it, he has to admit it in practice. He denies it at the outset but cannot sustain the denial.
The Muslim world was getting along with us much better a single generation ago than it is now. A century ago, it was ruled by a few despots and some European empires and wasn't capable of making any serious trouble, and was not seriously trying. Arabs were mad at Turks, and willing to ally with Brits against them. There is no place for this obvious historical fact in his cartoon.
Muslim fundamentalism is a new, modern political phenomenon. It echoes older but minority traditions - Hanbal was persecuted in his own day, Tayymia died in jail as a heretic and rebel. It is consciously reactionary. It works with other radical movements in the Islamic world, though it also sometimes fights them.
It is not perennial Islam, or the history of relations between all Muslim countries and all western countries since the 7th century. Above all, Islam is not a political monolith. It hasn't been politically united since the Mongols. They do not agree on who their own rulers are or who their real enemies are, from day to day.
Men like Osama are trying to create such agreement and usurp the power of all the existing rulers, to make such decisions according to their radical ideology. But it is not already there. They are also trying to persuade all Muslims to become followers of Tayymia, but they have not done so. Want evidence? There are 3 million Muslims in the US. Since 9/11, less than 30 have actively carried out Osama's orders, being conservative about it. 1 per 100,000 is not unity.