Posted on 02/20/2006 7:46:11 AM PST by Dark Skies
When President Bush gave his "axis of evil" speech he went out of his way to make the world understand that it isn't a war with Islam itself that we were joining — and I say joining because the war had been started by the Jihadists decades before. And, in observance to our Western principles, that must be the correct way to view our conflagration with radical Islam.
Let's face facts, it certainly is uncomfortable to a Westerner who has been brought up on tolerance, freedom of religion, and liberty to contemplate a war against an entire religion. But are we approaching a time when Western nations won't have a choice but to target Islam itself in certain ways to keep their own people safe. The best course of action is to make public displays of Islam and certain of its practices illegal in Western nations.
So, the question becomes are we at that time now? Are we fast approaching a time when Mosques will be closed and banned? Have we come to a time when Islamic literature is turned away from our borders? Have the childish and dangerous reactions of Muslims to this cartoon in a Danish newspaper proven that Islam cannot be trusted to be a vital, peaceful, and law-abiding segment of society?
It is looking like yes is the answer to these queries.
We are already approaching this today. In Ontario they have officially outlawed Muslim Sharia law, that law that uses religious precepts to enforce moral and society codes of conduct. And Muslim "family councils" have been stopped where local community groups may supplement Canadian law with their local custom.
Several members of the John Howard administration in Australia have spoken out against Islamic clashes with Western notions of law and societal comportment many times over the last few years.
Recently Howard himself said, "I do think there is this particular complication because there is a fragment which is utterly antagonistic to our kind of society, and that is a difficulty ... You can't find any equivalent in Italian, or Greek, or Lebanese, or Chinese or Baltic immigration to Australia. There is no equivalent of raving on about jihad, but that is the major problem."
Muslims routinely destroy property, threaten death and bodily harm to those who speak out against them, and they constantly fund terrorism throughout the world. In Syria they have burnt an embassy, in Europe Muslims have been responsible for murdering people who have written out against Islam or made movies, and other forms of art. These actions are also approved by Islamic teachers (Imams) and religious leaders, not just undertaken by warped loners claiming to represent Islam quite against the will of the majority or authority.
With this ridiculous cartoon issue, we have seen that Islam has no sense of perspective. In the west parody or satire is seen as not only common, but completely harmless for the most part. And religion is not immune to parody and satire, though even in the west most people are often uncomfortable with religious satire. Usually only people filled with hate attack religion in parody and most in the West instinctively know this. As a result, most people dismiss such parody as foolishness and bad taste.
But with Muslims overreacting — in western eyes at least — to this silly cartoon issue in the way they have, it becomes nearly impossible for Westerners to view Islam as a peaceful religion, but more as a vicious hate group itself. And that perception is justified with the actions that Muslims have increasingly perpetrated over the ensuing years. So, we find that Islam presents a danger to the safety of the populace all too often. It is violent, oppressive, and reactionary.
But, what is to be done about it? We have been raised to feel that religion should be left untouched by government. Freedom of religion is at the very core of our beliefs. And this concept is an important one to uphold. So, how can we honestly and without hypocrisy begin to look toward making Islam illegal?
There is a parallel of sorts in the USA that might be used as a template for action. The Ku klux Klan.
After the Civil War ended, the KKK arose from the ashes of war as an advocacy group for the disenfranchised white voter in the south. But it quickly became a terrorist organization bent on taking out revenge on the south's newly freed black population for having lost the war. It got so bad that even one of the original organizers, C.S. Cavalry General Nathan Bedford Forrest, denounced the organization and quit it in disgust.
But as the late 1800s rolled on and the south began to re-enter the Union as full partners in government, the KKK began to lose steam and prominence. For a time it subsided. But as the 20th century neared, it re-emerged and this time became a nationwide and powerful force taking on the flavor of religious, civic and racial duty. The KKK became invested in government and claimed millions of members nation wide.
In the 1920s, however, it became too much for a liberty loving country to allow the KKK to any longer exist. In Indiana, the entire state government was scandalized by their fealty to Indiana's Klan leader who had raped and beaten his secretary on a train trip. Violence against and frequent lynching of southern blacks became so pervasive that Congress finally acted and banned the Klan. The organization collapsed never again to reclaim the power and prominence it once had.
Now, the KKK has always based its precepts on Christianity, as well as racial identity. It also reacted with violence, rallies, death threats and killing when it was threatened. It careened far away from being a mere "idea" or religious theology and became a terrorist organization. And it became a terrorist organization even though literally millions of Americans that belonged to or identified with the Klan were not themselves violent, evil, or dangerous citizens.
The leadership of the Klan supported violence. The leadership preached violence. The leadership planned and fomented it. Therefore, it had to go because it became a danger to every law-abiding citizen, whether they agreed with the racial and religious concepts the Klan espoused or not.
Islam has become the KKK of the 21st century. The sooner we awake to this truth and take steps to ban the religion, or somehow curtail its pernicious influence the better. The west is going to have to put sever restrictions on Islamic Mosques and public display of Islam. Further, devout Muslims should not be allowed to hold public office (though it certainly should not become a racial issue — sins of the father should not be visited upon the sons).
This is no religious purge as in centuries past. In the past religions were banned to be replaced by the state sponsored sect and believers of the banned religion were mistreated, tortured, unduly taxed, and terrorized. This is absolutely not the model the west would follow by banning aspects of Islam today. No religion is replacing Islam and no one is suggesting that Muslims be mistreated. But the creed to which they hold is fast becoming the most dangerous one in the world today. It is a fine line that we walk to consider banning Islam, but the safety of society is at risk not to do so.
This is not an easy conclusion at which to arrive. But if we continue to turn a blind eye to the danger that Islam presents to the west, we are signing our own death warrants.
The KKK was put down in the USA and made powerless for the same reason. Communism was destroyed for the same reason, as well. Islam is a danger to the world.
Unfortunately, it is just that simple.
The dems gave me the idea we shouldn't be watching, and if they had any real control over the matter (not that they aren't trying) they would arrest any LEO that was rumored to be doing it.
I suspect our watching is not all that intrusive, and therefore, not as effective as it should be.
BUMP
If you can't or won't answer the question that's okay with me.
islam is not a religion. it is a political ideology, not unlike nazism....but actaully quite similar.
How it became a religion is quite interesting. I imagine in a few hundred years if nazism makes a resurgence there could be a possibility that it too can become a religion...then therefore must be 'tolerated'.
Do you really think anyone cares? If so, you're either a MSM drone or someone who also thinks the US should atone for its past history of imperialism, colonialism, genocide (natives), etc - ya' know, the standard fare one sees at any leftist rally.
The Boy can stay where he is at,,The problem is when he comes for mine.I don't suggest you be with him.
GRIND
Actually, according to some Simon, Paula and Randy (American Idol) are the most watched people in America.
That is both a fact and a sad commentary.
I dfo not disagree with your "not at the expense of my civil liberties" point of view. What I, and a good many others, have been saying is that it is sometimes necessary to do a bit of evil to achieve a greater good.
This is not just an enemy we can defeat militarily in a few months and safely go back to ignoring. This is a world-wide movement of otherwise desperate souls that seeks our destruction. Barring that, they'll settle for pulling our soiciety down to a level that equals theirs (slightly more advanced than the typical anthill).
This was the same pattern of the Second World War and the Old War; a technologically, philosphically and ethically backwards totalitarian society is battling it's complete opposite; and, once again, can only win if we let it.
What we would be asked to sacrifice in the name of victory in this war is no more or less than what our grandparents were asked to sacrifice during WWII. The only difference is that the media would be there 24/7 offering constant and inane commentary on it all.
Very difficult for the public to actually "give up" it's civil and human rights when the press is there before the ink on the press release is dry.
If your objection is that such things are "un-American", then you need to read up on your history. The same (and worse) has been done in a national emergency (and even a few non-emergencies). What's un-American is sitting idly by while our society is picked apart at the seams by radical ideologies that flourish under, yet seek to destroy, our system.
Getting rid of a parasite is ALWAYS a good idea. The method is unimportant.
"My neighbor's committed no crimes. He doesn't want to overthrow anything. But he is a Muslim...one of your enemies, to hear you rant."
Isn't that essentially what the neighbors of the 9/11 terrorist hijackers said after the fact?
I asked YOU to answer the question. Whether I know the answer or not is not at issue.
"The Boy can stay where he is at,,The problem is when he comes for mine.I don't suggest you be with him."
And that's just fine. He's not looking to attack anyone. Nor is he looking to be attacked. I'm solely in defensive mode here.
The KKK was a violent religious organization which was banned, first amendment or no.
Won't some of you closet liberals please tell me what is the difference between Islam (both the terrorists and those who support them, tacitly or otherwise) and the KKK? The comnplicit who remain silent are just as guilty as the perpetrators.
The islamoterrorists advocate and practice the slaughter of "infidels".
The KKK advocated and practiced the slaughter of African-Americans.
The difference please?
True, if Hitler had contained his attrocities to just Germany for 20 years longer, instead of invading his neighbors, it very well could have turned into a religious movement.
"This was the same pattern of the Second World War and the Old War; a technologically, philosphically and ethically backwards totalitarian society is battling it's complete opposite; and, once again, can only win if we let it."
Beg yer pardon, that was supposed to read COLD War.
Which brings to mind another inconsistency with this Klan/Islamofascist comparison.
The later have had quite a few more years to develop their murderous ways...covered a lot more ground.
I agree with you.
The trouble is islam is based on follows mohammds example as the "al insan al kamil" (the "perfect man") whose vile examples muslims are to emulate. His ideology is based on territorial expansion (by the sword if need be) and dawah, and examples of jihad.
Islam, in its pure from, is obliged to take over and impose its beliefs on others until the coming of the end of days so nobody is really safe. Not even muslims. The "true believers" know of the prophecy of the 72 sects, where the ummah is divided into 73 sects, 72 of which will be false, and doomed.
So even if islam were victorious in the Dar ul harb, and 5 billion Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Agnostics, Atheists, etc were butchered by them so their islamic fantasies of global domination came true, they would be still be obliged to kill each other until only the perfect muslims who followed mohamMADs own example are left.
Islam is not only our enemy, its a muslims own worst enemy. Nobody oppresses and gets muslims killed better than their own "true believers."
I wish we could air the truth on this evil to expose it for what it is... the truth will set the slaves of allah free.
Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.
Islam qualifies by definition as much as Christianity or Judaism. Perhaps the dictionary needs to be rewritten.
Since you are unable I'll help you. It was Hitler. You may have heard of him but I guess I shouldn't assume anything.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.