Dhimmis and "moderate" Muslims*, that is. This is why I will continue seeding Fitna on Bittorrent -- just to stick it to these people.
I will also link the LiveLeak version of it. (Yes, it's back for now -- via.)
Fitna is hard to watch and I literally could not bear to watch parts of it because it shows footage from major jihadist attacks, like 9/11. Seeing this footage rips my heart out, so you can understand if I am disgusted by people who are outraged not by the footage, but by how "intolerant" Fitna is of poor Islam.
*I don't accept that these people are moderate Muslims. Truly moderate Muslims will worry more about attacking the jihadists than they do about attacking Geert Wilders and other critics of Islamic radicalism. Moderate Muslims may exist, but these people ain't them.
Two years ago, the Danish Mohammed cartoons caused riots and controversy. Bloggers are being asked to reprint the cartoons in solidarity. So, here is one of the best known ones:
I have my own take on the Mohammed cartoon controversy after the jump...
Some time ago, I used the above cartoon to make the following parody, which I never posted until now:
I'm still on hiatus, but I wanted to point this out because it's important.
The 910 Group blog has posted YouTube links to a British television special that goes undercover in a radical, Saudi-influenced mosque in Great Britain. The funny thing about this particular mosque is it passes itself off as "moderate" and willing to have an interfaith dialog. However, the sermons preached tell a completely different story. I only had time to watch the first video this morning, but I plan to watch the rest tonight. I just hope they are still on YouTube then.
The problem with hearing the word 'Allah' just before you get on an airplane is that that is the last word hundreds of innocent people heard just before the plane they were on smashed into a very tall building. So, oddly enough, "fearful, ignorant" passengers (i.e., normal, unbrainwashed people with functioning congnitive abilities, not to mention the airline's experts in terrorist behaviour) decided hey, that's a red flag.
Americans know more about Islam now than they ever did before 9/11. And you know what: the more they learn, the less lots of 'em like it. "Education" doesn't always go your way Earl.
I've never said every Muslim is a terrorist. But again, someone with normal cognitive abilities and a functioning television set, internet connection and newspaper subscription is obliged to conclude that most terrorists happen to be Muslims.
Only an incurious dolt wouldn't wonder why. Again, the problem isn't RightGirl and I taking the Koran out of context -- it is the way radical Muslims "take" the Koran that worries me, and should worry you, but you are too busy worrying about the coming to life of The Handmaid's Tale or global warming to see the threat right in front of your face.
Not to mention a "Handmaid's Tale" type society would be far more likely to happen under Islamic sharia law. The idea that orthodox Christianity could produce such a society is ridiculous.
To me, the very basic argument about the "holiness" of the Koran is this: either the angel Gabriel has MPD, or the Koran is, at best, a work of fiction. It is so elementary, I am always amazed that I never hear anyone (except me and a few evangelicals who, God bless them, are not too hip to believe in the devil) say it. The Angel Gabriel who dictated the Koran and the Angel Gabriel who told Mary that she was about to be impregnated by the Holy Spirit and give birth to Jesus, cannot be the same Angel Gabriel. Because Angel Gabriel #2 does not believe in the divinity of Jesus.
Since I'm one of those archaic idiots who still believes in the devil, I believe the second Angel Gabriel was an imposter. The fact that the intent of Islam is to covert the world and thereby wipe out Judaism and Christianity would seem, to my simple mind, to be proof enough of its origin.
Now, more on this subject...Both James Joyner and C.D. Harris respond to this Guardian piece that complains about the growing usage of the word "Islamofascism" while regretting that the word "fascist" can't be used convincingly against the Bush Administration.
While it's not a term I use -- I prefer the more established "Islamists" -- "Islamo-fascist" is not used merely to describe a set of ideas with which, presumably, virtually all Americans disagree. Rather, it describes the political credo that motivates a terrorist movement and its sympathizers. The facist label is used because the fascsist ideology, like Islamism, required an absolute fealty to a dogma issued by a central leadership, a totalitarian worship of that idea, and terroristic violence to kill or intimidate the opposition.
Then Joyner comments on the absurdity of attempting to hang the "fascist" label on Republicans:
Amazingly, in an article attempting to persuade readers that the use of incendiary labels applied to mass murderers should be avoided, the author expresses his disappointment that the attempt to tar a democratically elected leader with a similar label isn't sticking. Norm Geras correctly notes that even Trotsky was able to "cut through the kind of sorry and dangerous claptrap that minimizes or altogether eliminates the differences between democratic polities and the openly undemocratic, and murderous, movements that are intent on destroying them."
Nazism is better known for its death camps than for Leni Riefenstahl or the Reichstag fire, so analogies between the Nazis' early years and current Republican party behaviour seem hollow, no matter how strong some parallels might be.
Naturally, he fails to mention that the American filmmaker most aptly compared to Riefenstahl is none other than Guardian poster child Michael Moore. Nor does he supply any actual examples of Republican behaviour that analogize to the Reichstag fire or other episodes in the rise of National Socialism in Germany. Well, none that correspond with reality, anyway.
Joyner also looks at liberal talk-show host Janeane Garofalo's ridiculous attempt to equate the inked fingers showing solidarity with the Iraqi voters with a "Nazi salute".
Being on hiatus, I haven't had a chance to comment on a lot of things. One story I wanted to say something about was the horrific situation in Russia, where Islamist terrorists took hundreds of children hostage, tormented them by depriving them of food, water and sleep, and then slaughtered many of them, along with many adults (including parents who were trying to rescue their children).
The whole situation breaks my heart. I pray for the survivors and for the Russian people. I pray that those who did this evil are brought to justice. I pray that nothing like this ever happens again.
The fact that the mainstream media doesn't even want to mention the religion of the terrorists is sad evidence that too many of us don't want to face who the real enemy is.
Israel, America, Bali, Spain, Russia and others have all suffered because of Islamofascist terrorism. This is the real enemy - not American "imperialism" and "hegemony". Not President Bush. Not the "neocons". Americans, if you think something like this couldn't happen here, then you have learned absolutely nothing from 9/11. Those of you in other nations should note that it's not just America they hate. They hate any nation that stands in the way of the imperialist goals of their religion.
Although the mainstream media is afraid to say it, our enemies are radical Islamists. Those who see us as "things" to be slaughtered, conquered and subjugated are radical Islamists. (Yes, I know that not all Muslims are Islamists. I'm not talking about all Muslims. But it seems to me that more and more Muslims are being taken in by the Islamist ideology.)
When referring to that particular subset of radical, fundamentalist Muslims who dream of creating a worldwide Caliphate (where non-Muslims are given the choice of conversion, slavery or death), I usually use the terms "radical Islam" or "Islamists". But "Islamofascism" and "Islamofascist" also are very good at conveying what a dangerous, fanatical enemy we face. I have used them before and I will continue to do so. Perhaps more often now, since I've been told that those are "bad" word.
I suppose I'm a "bad" Christian if I use such politically incorrect and "insensitive" terms to describe radical Islamists. I guess this means that to be a "good" Christian, I have to embrace a philosophy of niceness and non-offensiveness. Well, then, I guess I'm a "bad" Christian. So be it.
I refuse to stick my head in the sand and pretend that our enemies aren't really so bad and if we just gave them more foreign aid, along with a big bear hug, they would stop wanting to kill us. Reality doesn't bear that out. So, just as President Reagan unflinchingly called the Soviet Union the "Evil Empire", I will also refuse to water down my references to our enemies. If I want to call them "Islamofascists" or "Islamists", I'll damn well do so. Tut-tut me all you want -- I don't care.
I haven't had the mental energy to blog the past few days. I wanted to say some things about the Abu Gharib prison situation. But now I feel like everything I wanted to say has been eclipsed by the horror of Nicholas Berg's beheading at the hands of Islamist terrorists.
As Rachel Lucas and Jared say better than I can, what happened at Abu Gharib was wrong. It's shameful and embarrassing. Those responsible should be punished and I don't think any excuses should be made for this sort of behavior. I think it's preposterous to blame Rumsfeld or Bush for this. But this scandal makes all of us look bad, and we are better than this. These few soldiers with their pictures have made better propaganda for the Bush-haters and America-haters than ten Michael Moore flicks and a hundred Tell Rall cartoons.
I haven't seen the video of Nicholas Berg's beheading and I won't because I don't think I could bear it. On another blog, I accidentally ran across a still picture of them holding his severed head, and that was too much for me. Just reading the description was too much.
As Mark Shea says here, the Islamists have inadvertently provided moral clarity:
But let's not do the moral equivalence thing and imagine that this [Abu Gharib] aberration, condemned by virtually all Americans, is the same thing as the revolting policy of cold-blooded murder which Al-Quaeda exists for no other purpose than to promote.
But Mark also warns us not to let a great evil cause us to excuse lesser evils. This is something I'm struggling with right now:
It makes atrocities so much easier to commit if we can console ourselves that we're not as bad as the Bad Guys...We *must* not allow ourselves to be remade in the image of our enemies.
To people who still babble about "root causes", who think "they hate us" because we don't give enough foreign aid, who want to blame Bush for everything, whose thinking is steeped in political correctness, who suffer from pacifist delusions, I have this to say: Pull your head out of your nether regions, clean your eyes and ears and get a clue! The Islamists hate us because we're not Muslims -- we are the Dar al-harb, the "House of War". The hate us because they don't see us as human, we are "things" to them, things that need to be conquered or destroyed.
As they murdered Nick Berg, these savages shouted, "God is great!" Well, whatever god they worship is not the God I worship. Look at the fruit that radical Islam bears -- it is evil, poisonous fruit. It is not from God.
Some people seem to be losing heart because of recent events. That is exactly what the Islamists are relying on. They think we are weak and decadent. Some of us are one or both of those things. But we can't be. We have to be a strong and decent people. We have to "suck it up" as INDC Journal says. The alternative is unthinkable.
[Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad] added: "We don't make a distinction between civilians and non-civilians, innocents and non-innocents. Only between Muslims and unbelievers. And the life of an unbeliever has no value. It has no sanctity."
That cuts through all the BS, doesn't it? No "root causes" talk or anything like that -- very direct and clear-cut. We know where we stand with people like this cleric. Sometimes it really is that simple.
In Egypt, the Religion of Peace™ has chosen a new symbol to answer the Christian fish symbol -- a shark:
"All I wanted to say is that I am a Christian, kind of expressing my Coptic identity," said 25-year-old Miriam Greiss, who has a fish sticker on her car. "I think choosing a shark doesn't make sense, as if someone is saying, 'I am a violent, bloody creature, look at me.'"
Emad, a Muslim, laughed when asked about the competing symbols but was unapologetic about the two shark stickers on his car.
"The Christians had the fish so we responded with the shark. If they want to portray themselves as weak fishes, OK. We are the strongest," said Emad, who would give only his first name. [...]
Copts often wear gold cross pendants or have tiny crosses tattooed on the inside of their wrists, but the stickers seem a more public step. Karl Innemee, a specialist in Coptic studies at the American University in Cairo, said the arrival of the fish could reflect a new desire by Egyptian Christians "to express themselves openly." [...]
While the fish stickers came from America, the symbol has roots in Egypt. In their earliest days, Copts used the fish - perhaps the emblem is from the biblical story of the loaves and fishes - as a way to identify themselves to each other without letting their Roman rulers know.
The Copts are wide awake and are keeping an eye on those sharks. Will the rest of the Christian world wake up?
Lt. Gen. Boykin got into trouble for doing it. Rod Dreher is in trouble for doing it. Now, the Vatican has done it as well. Look for the politically correct (both Christian and secular) to squeal and swoon. Wait for CAIR and other Islamist groups to whine and pitch a fit.
I'm glad to see people tell the truth about radical Islam. I'm sick of the touchy-feely appeasers* who try gloss over radicalism in the Islamic world and blame Islamist terrorism on everything and everyone but the Islamofascists. I'm sorry, but I don't want to reach out to the jihadists and "understand" them. I don't think it's very smart to be solicitous of those who want you enslaved or dead.
As for this, President Bush may be just doing what politicians do, but frankly, it's disappointing.
'IT is not the American war machine that should be of the utmost concern to Muslims. What threatens the future of Islam, in fact its very survival, is American democracy." This is the message of a new book, just published by al Qaeda in several Arab countries.
Al-Ayyeri argues that the history of mankind is the story of "perpetual war between belief and unbelief." Over the millennia, both have appeared in different guises. As far as belief is concerned, the absolutely final version is represented by Islam, which "annuls all other religions and creeds." Thus, Muslims can have only one goal: converting all humanity to Islam and "effacing the final traces of all other religions, creeds and ideologies."
He says that it is vital to prevent any normalization and stabilization in Iraq. Muslim militants should make sure that the United States does not succeed in holding elections in Iraq and creating a democratic government. "If democracy comes to Iraq, the next target [for democratization] would be the whole of the Muslim world," Al-Ayyeri writes.
A CLEAN-UP JOB - Bryan Preston looks at how cleaning up the Islamic world is going very difficult, especially if moderate Muslims are reluctant to distance themselves from the radicals. (I've been thinking along similar lines lately. Since Saddam's regime is gone, the mullahs in Iraq see their chance to grab power. And they seem to hold much sway over a sizeable portion the Iraqi people. Talk about out of a frying pan and into another frying pan...)
Nice peaceful religion, that Islam. You emerge from a mosque after supposedly praying to and worshipping the One True God and then chortle at people dying a horrible death to avoid another horrible death.
Check out Occidental Intelligence Briefing to understand what America is up against in this war against terrorism. The Islamofascists' ultimate goal is to enslave us all. If they had their way, we would either have to convert to Islam or die. And the thing is, many of these people are here in this country right now, hating us, our freedoms, everything we stand for. Keep in mind, "Islam" does not mean "peace", it means "submission".
