The Koran: A New Mein Kampf?

Human Events Online ^ | 07 December 2005 | Robert Spencer

[unionblue83]

Last week in New York Oriana Fallaci said that “the Koran is the Mein Kampf of this movement. The Koran demands the annihilation or subjugation of the other, and wants to substitute totalitarianism for democracy….You will find that all the evil that the sons of Allah commit against themselves and against others is in it."

This statement has caused considerable controversy. Some maintained: “There are moderate Moslems…Tarring the whole religion is counterproductive…If there are no moderate muslims, as Fallaci says, then we are doomed.” But of course, Fallaci did not say that there were no moderate Muslims; she said that there was no moderate Islam. As Ibn Warraq has said, "There may be moderate Muslims, but Islam itself is not moderate." There are peaceful Muslims who have no intention of working by violent or subversive means to impose Sharia on the West. This does not mitigate the fact that some high-profile moderates, such as Cleveland Imam Fawaz Damra, who signed the recent Fiqh Council of North America's fatwa against terrorism, turned out to be deceivers. Still, to say that the Koran is the Mein Kampf of the jihad movement is not to deny the reality that many, if not most, people who identify themselves as Muslims are primarily interested in living ordinary lives.

[dennisw]

Mein Kampf sales in the Arab Muslim world are very good.

Muhammedans love to talk about plots and conspiracies with no better grist for the Muslim rumor mill than an imaginary Jewish plot or conspiracy. So they love Mein Kampf since there's a lot of Hitler going on about Jewish conspiracies

[unionblue83]

Just checking my six. Thanks.

[wouldntbprudent]

Remember when Michael Graham got canned for saying that organized Islam today is a terrorist organization?

He explained that that did not mean that every Muslim was a terrorist. It meant that every Muslim was a member of a terrorist organization.

It's like this:

I join an environmental group because I agree with its goals about the environment.

Over time the group's leaders begin to espouse ideology that states that terrorist acts in the name of "saving" the environment are okay, even required by the organization's charter.

Other leaders in the group do not condemn these statements and do nothing to stop these terrorist acts. They do not at all refute the conclusion that the group's charter requires terrorist acts.

I'm still sitting there as a member of this organization. I am not a terrorist. I do not commit terrorist acts. Nevertheless, I am in fact a member of a terrorist organiztaion---a group which espouses that it's very founding charter requires terrorism in order to reach the group's goals.

Islam today is a terrorist organization and so long as few Muslims condemn, refute and reject terrorism in the name of Allah, it will remain so.

[B.O. Plenty]

The challenge for peaceful Muslims today is to confront, not to deny, this obvious fact, and to formulate strategies for a large-scale rejection of literalism in the Islamic community in America and worldwide, so that Muslims can coexist peacefully as equals with non-Muslims without the continuing recrudescence of this supremacist impulse.

...The problem within islam is not with the flock, but with the leadership. I contend that from the beginning, islam "leadership" was and is now to a man, lunitics, murderers, and terrorists. Islam, for it to exist today requires lunitics, murderers and terrorists in charge in order to keep the flock together (you will be muslums, or we will kill you). Remove the threat of a horrible death or other violence for not signing up, or leaving islam, islam as we know it will die. People would leave mohammadism in droves, esp. women.

[wouldntbprudent]

Most religions are like this. Many Mormons, for example, are unfamiliar with all that is entailed in their religion. Same with Christians of various denominations.

The difference here is, if Mormonism or some Christian sect began advocating, blessing, requiring and applauding the terrorist acts so originating in Islam, few of even the "unschooled" adherents would stand by and say "I guess it's okay."

They would either say if this is what "my" religion is really all about, I'm out of here. Or they would say "this can't possibly be what my religion should entail; I reject and condemn these acts."

Neither of those reactions are happening in a significant way in Islam.

[RedStateRocker]

"How many Christians actually read the Bible?:
In the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, to make the analogy accurate.

[tsomer]

I was about to reply to #6 , who remarked that the koran predates Mein Kampf.

True, of course, but the power of the Koran was unleashed sometime after MK appeared. The key was, paradoxically, literacy: as mohamedans have became literate enough to read what was actually written, this doctrine has become more widely destructive. Before this relatively few could do more than recite a few verses and were dependant on the interpretations moderation of others.

Well, that's my hypothesis. What do you think?

[TheCrusader]

"The Koran: A New Mein Kampf?"

Well, we all saw Saddam Hussein grasping and waving the koran around throughout his war crimes trial. It apparently is his Mein Kampf. And when the beasts who have sawed off the heads of Westerners did their filthy deeds they chanted from the koran, which instructs them to do such deeds to "infidels". So it is not only their Mein Kampf, it is also their militia training manual and their Constitution. When this frightening book was (falsely) reported to have been flushed down a toilet at Gitmo we saw the murderous reaction to the report in Afghanistan. I don't think any Nazi would have been phased by a similar report in WWII Germany. These people make Nazis seem civil.

[Gefreiter]

P,
Heh, beats me. Not so very many, I'd wager.

I think a big difference though is that the Christian book is accessible through translation, but the Muslim book would appear not to be so.

I mean, there aren't alot of Christian believers out there who say that to truly know the word of God, you must read Aramaic, say, and if you can't then you can't ever be a true Christian.

[E.Allen]

This begs the question, "who were the moderate Nazis."

[Gefreiter]

t,
In terms of martial power, the power of the Koran was unleashed soon after it was created.

Recall that throughout the 8th century Islam was spread by conquest west across North Africa, and lodging in Europe; and east across south Asia. By the 14th century it was possible to travel from Malaysia to Morocco and never want for a mosque.

In that line of reasoning, Muslims today are far less destructive than they historically have proven themselves capable of.

[TheWormster]

Bad argument I am afraid. Islam is not a unified organisation. There are LOTS of sects of Islam, some of which are violent, some of which are not. A better analogy would be if you joined an environmental group that wanted to (for example) save the Panda by not lobbying government to ban the killing of Pandas. Meanwhile another, seperate group who also wanted to save the Panda by killing people who shot pandas. You would not be responsible for the actions of the murderers, would you?

[Bitsy]

My whole church of approx. 2,000 reads the bible regularly and try to apply it to our daily lives.

[Wings-n-Wind]

Thanks for the great post.

This article is the right premise that correctly constitutes the "feet of clay" underpinning this ludicrous belief system. (See Daniel 2)
These "scriptures" were written by one camel jockey who was bent on war -- rape-burn-pillage mentality -- and was known as a whoremonger and documented pedophile ---

Who... when what he had previously written as a "revelation" from some god -- when that didn't suit his lifestyle; He simply edited, deleted, re-authored -- or offered "interpretations" by fiat.

For example -- some changes of interpretations or "fresh revelations" that did suit him.... one-man & one-woman marriage.... quickly became one-man for many women/"wives" all of whom were kept and treated as chattel property.... And the age of female eligibility for marriage became younger and younger -- has he grew older and older... and more self-centered.

And while declaring his "god most merciful"... He was into wholesale slaughter of the innocents -- anyone who didnt agree with him -- or bow down to him -- and his "revelation".

Lastly.... the author's sorry bones remain in his grave... one can take the tour and see the tomb.

FYI -- He is not returning....

When the day comes that we can engage these "scholars" in meaningful dialogue and honest assessment and comparison of these "scriptures" to the Torah and the Bible... And do so with intellectual honesty instead of "kill the infidels" mentality --

ON THE SIMPLE GROUNDS OF:...
1)Validating the integrity of the document's textual transmission through the years --
(2)Measuring the consistency of the character of the revelator -- as a true disciple of these beliefs in his own right..... and
(3) Evaluating the contributions of this belief system to the relationships, peace, well-being of its followers, and its promises of eternal life to the adherents.

THEN....
We will see this false belief system crumble -- its major populations liberated in worship, thought and societal value -- AND the last radical adherents marginalized by thewir own peoples, geo-politically isolated, and/or swiftly dealt with by military force.

This whole gig is a LOSER on all counts, and has literally imprisoned those who were blindly forced into it from earliest childhood.

May the only true God of heaven and earth open their eyes to see, their minds to learn of Him, and their hearts to receive and embrace His true revealing of unconditional love for all who call on the holy Name.

Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD.
--Psalm 33:12

[B.O. Plenty]

I think that the only real literacy (re: the koran) change among mohammadians is that which the islam "leadership" has gained, if you know what I mean. The "flock" is as ignorant of the koran as ever...and is by design and intentional, kind of like a conspiricy, if you will.

For example, I see images of hordes of people facing mecca with their butts in the air and their heads on the floor with some lunitic supposedly chanting some verse out of the koran in a language that most of the people there don't understand. The imam could be chanting out of "Little Red Riding Hood", and nobody would know. I don't see small groups of muslums doing koran studies, trying to figure out what it is telling them....the imams, ayatollas, and other islam "learneds" interpert the koran words for them.

I agree then that until the "flock" actually find out what the koran really says, and either accept it or reject it, there can be no "reformation" within islam...if ever. And as long as lunitics are in charge, and the threat of exrteme violence is over the heads of the "flock", islam will not change. It must be changed from without....the current "leadership" will not give up their power easily.

[tsomer]

Recall that throughout the 8th century Islam was spread by conquest west across North Africa, and lodging in Europe; and east across south Asia.

True, but it is also said that many of the established caliphates practiced a degree of tolerance. There are also recorded instances of cruelty beyond even what the Koran allows, ie wholesale massacres of women and children as they begged for mercy. I don't believe it was out of kindness or adherence, but pragmatism or whatever suited their ends.

Leaders had the freedom to interpret as they pleased, having few who could site the authority of his claims. Now the vast, formerly subservient hordes of followers can challenge claims of legitimacy by their leaders. They can also assume authority and denounce rulers and claim the koran as their shield. That's what Bin Laden did; though well to do he was no royal. He found justification for his ambitions in the koran. I'd say that's fairly recent to that culture.

[Realism]

Naw, a more appropriate analogy would be "The Project" found in possession of a member of the Muslim Brotherhood.


The following are the principal points of departure of this policy:

Point of Departure 1: To know the terrain and adopt a scientific methodology for its planning and execution.

Point of Departure 2: To demonstrate proof of the serious nature of the work.

Point of Departure 3: To reconcile international engagement with flexibility at a local level.

Point of Departure 4: To reconcile political engagement and the necessity of avoiding isolation on one hand, with permanent education and institutional action on the other.

Point of Departure 5: To be used to establish an Islamic State; parallel, progressive efforts targeted at controlling the local centres of power through institutional action.

Point of Departure 6: To work with loyalty alongside Islamic groups and institutions in multiple areas to agree on common ground, in order to "cooperate on the points of agreement and set aside the points of disagreement".

Point of Departure 7: To accept the principle of temporary cooperation between Islamic movements and nationalist movements in the broad sphere and on common ground such as the struggle against colonialism, preaching and the Jewish state, without however having to form alliances. This will require, on the other hand, limited contacts between certain leaders, on a case by case basis, as long as these contacts do not violate the [shariah?] law. Nevertheless, one must not give them allegiance or take them into confidence, bearing in mind that the Islamic movement must be the origin of the initiatives and orientations taken.

Point of Departure 8: To master the art of the possible on a temporary basis without abusing the basic principles, bearing in mind that Allah's teachings always apply. One must order the suitable and forbid that which is not, always providing a documented opinion [? "Il faut ordonner le convenable et interdire le blâmable, tout en donnant un avis documenté"]. But we should not look for confrontation with our adversaries, at the local or the global scale, which would be disproportionate and could lead to attacks against the dawa or its disciples.

Point of Departure 9: To construct a permanent force of the Islamic dawa and support movements engaged in jihad across the Muslim world, to varying degrees and insofar as possible.

Point of Departure 10: To use diverse and varied surveillance systems, in several places, to gather information and adopt a single effective warning system serving the worldwide Islamic movement. In fact, surveillance, policy decisions and effective communications complement each other.

Point of Departure 11: To adopt the Palestinian cause as part of a worldwide Islamic plan, with the policy plan and by means of jihad, since it acts as the keystone of the renaissance of the Arab world today.

Point of Departure 12: To know how to turn to self-criticism and permanent evaluation of worldwide Islamic policy and its objectives, of its content and its procedures, in order to improve it. This is a duty and a necessity according to the precepts of sharia.

[vimto]

Many, even most didn't know what Mein Kampf said but we all know the results of it.

warm regards.

[wouldntbprudent]

Then the non-violent sects you claim should stand up and clearly condemn the Islamofascists. Except for the recent protests in Jordan, this has not happened, except on a very small, practically onesie-twosie scale.

The few individuals (Muslim and otherwise) who do speak up and condemn terrorism as an illegitimate expression of Islam are themselves condemned.

[M. Espinola]

"This begs the question, "who were the moderate Nazis."

Excellent point.