busybody..
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2002
- Posts
- 149,503
Muslim Appeasement By The West - Ignorance or Intent?
We are at war. … Let me mince no words in saying that from Fort Hood to Bali, from Times Square to London, from Madrid to Mumbai, from 9/11 to Gaza, the murderers, the barbarians are radical Islamists.
To camouflage their identity is sedition. To excuse their deeds is contemptible. To mask their intentions is unconscionable. --Rabbi S. Lewis
The West does camouflage, excuse, and mask the intentions of our mutual enemy and have not been charged with sedition, have avoided being seen as contemptible by the masses and have yet to be held accountable for their underlying intentions. Make no mistake, I believe the fault here is shared between inexcusable ignorance and so far partially unrevealed intentions.
The quote above is from a 4,000 word sermon which was delivered by Rabbi S. Lewis in Atlanta. Dr. Phyllis Chesler, who shares 1,400 words from the sermon, says the "2010 Rosh Hashana sermon was very long — but to the point. It is titled, in Yiddish, “Ehr Kumt” (He is Coming), or as I would say, a la Yeats, “the bloody beast is back.” I would like to share a bit more of the sermon and then share some commentary and facts on the same subject from a few other great minds.
Years ago when I first started working, I was told that I was not required to know everything, but I should be able to find out anything. Those of us in the United States of America would be well served to heed the advice and information shared in the following quotes, because as free American citizens we are not required to know everything, but there is no excuse for not being able to find out anything we need to know about our enemy and the challenges facing this nation's future in order to preserve our freedoms.
We are at war. We are at war with an enemy as savage, as voracious, as heartless as the Nazis but one wouldn’t know it from our behavior. During WWII we didn’t refer to storm troopers as freedom fighters. We didn’t call the Gestapo, militants. We didn’t see the attacks on our Merchant Marine as acts by rogue sailors. We did not justify the Nazis rise to power as our fault. We did not grovel before the Nazis, thumping our hearts and confessing to abusing and mistreating and humiliating the German people. We did not apologize for Dresden, nor for The Battle of the Bulge, nor for El Alamein, nor for D-Day.
Evil – ultimate, irreconcilable, evil threatened us and Roosevelt and Churchill had moral clarity and an exquisite understanding of what was at stake.
Not all Germans were Nazis – most were decent, most were revolted by the Third Reich, most were good citizens hoisting a beer, earning a living and tucking in their children at night. But, too many looked away, too many cried out in lame defense – “I didn’t know.” Too many were silent. Guilt absolutely falls upon those who committed the atrocities, but responsibility and guilt falls upon those who did nothing as well.
In WWII we won because we got it. We understood who the enemy was and we knew that the end had to be unconditional and absolute. We did not stumble around worrying about offending the Nazis. We did not measure every word so as not to upset our foe. We built planes and tanks and battleships and went to war to win … to rid the world of malevolence. [snip]
Democracies don’t always win.
Tyrannies don’t always lose.
My friends — the world is on fire and we must awake from our slumber. EHR KUMT.
Indeed democracies don't always win and here in the United States democracy is slowly being eroded. The freedoms this nation was founded upon are under attack. The ever prescient Mark Steyn discusses several free speech issues here in North America. After a visit to Guantanamo and seeing how Korans were handled, or actually not handled, by our military --not touched by infidel hands, gloves used, Korans placed in sterile medical masks and hung so as not to touch the ground or anything else-- Steyn said, "What does that degree of prostration before their prejudices tell them about us? It’s a problem that Muslims think we’re unclean. It’s a far worse problem that we go along with it." Steyn continues:
Take this no-name pastor from an obscure church who was threatening to burn the Koran. He didn’t burn any buildings or women and children. He didn’t even burn a book. He hadn’t actually laid a finger on a Koran, and yet the mere suggestion that he might do so prompted the President of the United States to denounce him, and the Secretary of State, and the commander of US forces in Afghanistan, various G7 leaders, and golly, even Angelina Jolie. President Obama has never said a word about honor killings of Muslim women. Secretary Clinton has never said a word about female genital mutilation. General Petraeus has never said a word about the rampant buggery of pre-pubescent boys by Pushtun men in Kandahar. But let an obscure man in Florida so much as raise the possibility that he might disrespect a book – an inanimate object – and the most powerful figures in the western world feel they have to weigh in.
Aside from all that, this obscure church’s website has been shut down, its insurance policy has been canceled, its mortgage has been called in by its bankers. Why? As Diana West wrote, why was it necessary or even seemly to make this pastor a non-person? Another one of Obama's famous "teaching moments"? In this case teaching us that Islamic law now applies to all? Only a couple of weeks ago, the President, at his most condescendingly ineffectual, presumed to lecture his moronic subjects about the First Amendment rights of Imam Rauf. Where's the condescending lecture on Pastor Jones' First Amendment rights?
When someone destroys a bible, US government officials don’t line up to attack him. President Obama bowed lower than a fawning maitre d’ before the King of Saudi Arabia, a man whose regime destroys bibles as a matter of state policy, and a man whose depraved religious police forces schoolgirls fleeing from a burning building back into the flames to die because they’d committed the sin of trying to escape without wearing their head scarves. If you show a representation of Mohammed, European commissioners and foreign ministers line up to denounce you. If you show a representation of Jesus Christ immersed in your own urine, you get a government grant for producing a widely admired work of art. Likewise, if you write a play about Jesus having gay sex with Judas Iscariot.
So just to clarify the ground rules, if you insult Christ, the media report the issue as freedom of expression: A healthy society has to have bold, brave, transgressive artists willing to question and challenge our assumptions, etc. But, if it’s Mohammed, the issue is no longer freedom of expression but the need for "respect" and "sensitivity" toward Islam, and all those bold brave transgressive artists don’t have a thing to say about it.
Steyn goes on to discuss the many Right leaning websites and blogs that have been shut down, the selective way Google allows sites to be ranked, the many ways Islam is given special rights, and also the Everybody Draw Mohammed Day author Molly Norris:
"There is no more Molly"? That's all the gutless pussies of The Seattle Weekly can say? As James Taranto notes in The Wall Street Journal, even much sought-after Ramadan-banquet constitutional scholar Barack Obama is remarkably silent:
Now Molly Norris, an American citizen, is forced into hiding because she exercised her right to free speech. Will President Obama say a word on her behalf? Does he believe in the First Amendment for anyone other than Muslims?
Who knows? Given his highly selective enthusiasms, you can hardly blame a third of Americans for figuring their president must be Muslim. In a way, that's the least pathetic explanation: The alternative is that he's just a craven squish. Which is odd considering he is, supposedly, the most powerful man in the world.[snip]
It is a basic rule of life that if you reward bad behavior, you get more of it. Every time Muslims either commit violence or threaten it, we reward them by capitulating. Indeed, President Obama, Justice Breyer, General Petraeus, and all the rest are now telling Islam, you don’t have to kill anyone, you don’t even have to threaten to kill anyone. We’ll be your enforcers. We’ll demand that the most footling and insignificant of our own citizens submit to the universal jurisdiction of Islam. (more)
Submit to the universal jurisdiction of Islam, that's where we are headed? Sounds like our freedoms are not just at risk, but some are actually gone. Rabbi Lewis and Mark Steyn should get together, they would truly have a lot to talk about with the world is on fire and we must awake from our slumber.
With so many fine people like the Rabbi, Steyn Victor David Hansen and many others, ignorance of the situation is no excuse. Which brings us to the intent.
There are reasons why the Muslims act as they do, why their loyalties are to their own and against all others. There is no reason for Western democracies to submit to the Koran or Islamic ways, none.
In The Specter of Muslim Disloyalty in America, Raymond Ibrahim says:
Islamist enmity for infidels, regularly manifested in the jihad, is by now moderately well known. Lesser known, however, but of equal concern, is the mandate for Muslims to be loyal to fellow Muslims and Islam — a loyalty that all too often translates into disloyalty to all things non-Muslim, including the American people and their government.
This dichotomy of loyalty to Muslims and enmity for infidels — which, incidentally, corresponds well with Islamic law's division of the world into the abode of war (deserving of enmity) and the abode of Islam (deserving of loyalty) — is founded on a Muslim doctrine called wala' wa bara' (best translated as "loyalty and enmity"). I first encountered this doctrine while translating various Arabic documents for The Al Qaeda Reader. In fact, the longest and arguably most revealing document I included in that volume is titled "Loyalty and Enmity" (pgs.63-115), compiled by Aymen Zawahiri, al Qaeda's number two.
I say "compiled" because most of the words are direct quotes from the Koran, the Muslim prophet Muhammad, and Islam's jurists (i.e., this doctrine is not an "al-Qaeda" phenomenon but rather permeates the Islamicate worldview). [snip]
Mr. Ibrahim notes Nasser Abdo, an infantryman assigned to the 101st Airborne Division, who refuses to deploy to Afghanistan; major Nidal Hasan of the infamous Fort Hood killing spree; sergeant Hasan Akbar, who was convicted of murder for killing two American soldiers and wounding fourteen in a grenade attack in Kuwait who wrote in his diary: "I may not have killed any Muslims, but being in the army is the same thing. I may have to make a choice very soon on who to kill."
The next question must be, does this interpretation of the Koran and Islam apply only to those in the official military? Of course not.
As for all other instances that require Muslims to indicate their loyalty, the doctrine of taqiyya, which revolves around deceiving non-Muslims, offers relief, and is in fact essential for Muslim minorities living in America who want to uphold the doctrine of loyalty and enmity. [snip]
Moreover, it is one thing if the average American Muslim harbors loyalty to fellow Muslims, including terrorists such as al Qaeda, Hamas, and Hezbollah. It is quite another if that Muslim happens to be in a position of authority in the United States. This observation naturally leads to a president who up to 24% of Americans and many Muslims believe is a clandestine Muslim and who at least appears to have been raised a Muslim: Barrack Hussein Obama.
While there is no proof that he is a Muslim — indeed, no less an authority than Jeremiah Wright, the fellow who used to bellow "God damn America!" recently vouched for Obama's Christianity — the point here is simple: if an American president was a secret Muslim, and if he was lying about it, and even if he was secretly working to subvert the US to Islam's advantage — not only would such an approach comport with Islam's doctrines on loyalty and deception, but it would have ample precedents, stretching back to the dawn of Islam. Such as when Muhammad commanded one Na'im bin Mas'ud, a convert from an adversarial tribe that refused to submit to Islam, to conceal his new Muslim identity, go back to his tribe — which he cajoled with a perfidious "You are my stock and my family, the dearest of men to me" — only to betray them to Islam.
Appeasement to Islam intentional? I believe yes. Let us not just concentrate our sights on Barack Hussein Soetoro Obama, but also on the many Muslim, pro-Palestinian, pro-Hamas advisors, czars, etc. Obama surrounds himself with. Let us also concentrate on and beware of the new Muslim college and numerous Turkey sponsored Fethullah Gulen charter schools around the United States.
Let us also watch the ever increasing Left-leaning and appeasing media, civil liberties groups who care not for the civil liberties of all but mainly for the liberties on Islam. Let us continue to watch the lopsided acceptance of Jew and Christian bashing. Keep in mind that the United Nations is dominated by Israel and American (and Western in general) hating Muslims.
Let us be fully aware of the ever increasing hatred of Jews and Israel, Christians and the West by Muslims and by Left/Progressives. Dr. Phyllis Chesler has been writing about "a possible second Holocaust against the Jewish state for a long time now" and notes that "many of the distinguished academic presenters at Yale University’s superb conference on global anti-Semitism shared at least a part of this vision." Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad makes no secret he wants Israel wiped off the face of the earth. This week his Iranian First Vice-President Mohammad Reza Rahimi reiterated that the Zionist regime is the agent and representative of the Satan on the Earth.
Could anyone think that the direction the world is headed is simply to be blamed on ignorance alone? No. Intent. Cold, hard, well-planned intent. You don't have to know everything, but there is no excuse for not knowing this. With our own president at the head of the line leading this country in the wrong direction, it is imperative that we see the truth, that we follow the brave souls like Mark Steyn, Geert Wilders, the Rabbi Lewis, and so many more. Be sure to see El Taqiyya Presidente, by R.J. Godlewski.
We can stop the ignorance. We can reveal the intent, We can turn things around.
We are at war. … Let me mince no words in saying that from Fort Hood to Bali, from Times Square to London, from Madrid to Mumbai, from 9/11 to Gaza, the murderers, the barbarians are radical Islamists.
To camouflage their identity is sedition. To excuse their deeds is contemptible. To mask their intentions is unconscionable. --Rabbi S. Lewis
The West does camouflage, excuse, and mask the intentions of our mutual enemy and have not been charged with sedition, have avoided being seen as contemptible by the masses and have yet to be held accountable for their underlying intentions. Make no mistake, I believe the fault here is shared between inexcusable ignorance and so far partially unrevealed intentions.
The quote above is from a 4,000 word sermon which was delivered by Rabbi S. Lewis in Atlanta. Dr. Phyllis Chesler, who shares 1,400 words from the sermon, says the "2010 Rosh Hashana sermon was very long — but to the point. It is titled, in Yiddish, “Ehr Kumt” (He is Coming), or as I would say, a la Yeats, “the bloody beast is back.” I would like to share a bit more of the sermon and then share some commentary and facts on the same subject from a few other great minds.
Years ago when I first started working, I was told that I was not required to know everything, but I should be able to find out anything. Those of us in the United States of America would be well served to heed the advice and information shared in the following quotes, because as free American citizens we are not required to know everything, but there is no excuse for not being able to find out anything we need to know about our enemy and the challenges facing this nation's future in order to preserve our freedoms.
We are at war. We are at war with an enemy as savage, as voracious, as heartless as the Nazis but one wouldn’t know it from our behavior. During WWII we didn’t refer to storm troopers as freedom fighters. We didn’t call the Gestapo, militants. We didn’t see the attacks on our Merchant Marine as acts by rogue sailors. We did not justify the Nazis rise to power as our fault. We did not grovel before the Nazis, thumping our hearts and confessing to abusing and mistreating and humiliating the German people. We did not apologize for Dresden, nor for The Battle of the Bulge, nor for El Alamein, nor for D-Day.
Evil – ultimate, irreconcilable, evil threatened us and Roosevelt and Churchill had moral clarity and an exquisite understanding of what was at stake.
Not all Germans were Nazis – most were decent, most were revolted by the Third Reich, most were good citizens hoisting a beer, earning a living and tucking in their children at night. But, too many looked away, too many cried out in lame defense – “I didn’t know.” Too many were silent. Guilt absolutely falls upon those who committed the atrocities, but responsibility and guilt falls upon those who did nothing as well.
In WWII we won because we got it. We understood who the enemy was and we knew that the end had to be unconditional and absolute. We did not stumble around worrying about offending the Nazis. We did not measure every word so as not to upset our foe. We built planes and tanks and battleships and went to war to win … to rid the world of malevolence. [snip]
Democracies don’t always win.
Tyrannies don’t always lose.
My friends — the world is on fire and we must awake from our slumber. EHR KUMT.
Indeed democracies don't always win and here in the United States democracy is slowly being eroded. The freedoms this nation was founded upon are under attack. The ever prescient Mark Steyn discusses several free speech issues here in North America. After a visit to Guantanamo and seeing how Korans were handled, or actually not handled, by our military --not touched by infidel hands, gloves used, Korans placed in sterile medical masks and hung so as not to touch the ground or anything else-- Steyn said, "What does that degree of prostration before their prejudices tell them about us? It’s a problem that Muslims think we’re unclean. It’s a far worse problem that we go along with it." Steyn continues:
Take this no-name pastor from an obscure church who was threatening to burn the Koran. He didn’t burn any buildings or women and children. He didn’t even burn a book. He hadn’t actually laid a finger on a Koran, and yet the mere suggestion that he might do so prompted the President of the United States to denounce him, and the Secretary of State, and the commander of US forces in Afghanistan, various G7 leaders, and golly, even Angelina Jolie. President Obama has never said a word about honor killings of Muslim women. Secretary Clinton has never said a word about female genital mutilation. General Petraeus has never said a word about the rampant buggery of pre-pubescent boys by Pushtun men in Kandahar. But let an obscure man in Florida so much as raise the possibility that he might disrespect a book – an inanimate object – and the most powerful figures in the western world feel they have to weigh in.
Aside from all that, this obscure church’s website has been shut down, its insurance policy has been canceled, its mortgage has been called in by its bankers. Why? As Diana West wrote, why was it necessary or even seemly to make this pastor a non-person? Another one of Obama's famous "teaching moments"? In this case teaching us that Islamic law now applies to all? Only a couple of weeks ago, the President, at his most condescendingly ineffectual, presumed to lecture his moronic subjects about the First Amendment rights of Imam Rauf. Where's the condescending lecture on Pastor Jones' First Amendment rights?
When someone destroys a bible, US government officials don’t line up to attack him. President Obama bowed lower than a fawning maitre d’ before the King of Saudi Arabia, a man whose regime destroys bibles as a matter of state policy, and a man whose depraved religious police forces schoolgirls fleeing from a burning building back into the flames to die because they’d committed the sin of trying to escape without wearing their head scarves. If you show a representation of Mohammed, European commissioners and foreign ministers line up to denounce you. If you show a representation of Jesus Christ immersed in your own urine, you get a government grant for producing a widely admired work of art. Likewise, if you write a play about Jesus having gay sex with Judas Iscariot.
So just to clarify the ground rules, if you insult Christ, the media report the issue as freedom of expression: A healthy society has to have bold, brave, transgressive artists willing to question and challenge our assumptions, etc. But, if it’s Mohammed, the issue is no longer freedom of expression but the need for "respect" and "sensitivity" toward Islam, and all those bold brave transgressive artists don’t have a thing to say about it.
Steyn goes on to discuss the many Right leaning websites and blogs that have been shut down, the selective way Google allows sites to be ranked, the many ways Islam is given special rights, and also the Everybody Draw Mohammed Day author Molly Norris:
"There is no more Molly"? That's all the gutless pussies of The Seattle Weekly can say? As James Taranto notes in The Wall Street Journal, even much sought-after Ramadan-banquet constitutional scholar Barack Obama is remarkably silent:
Now Molly Norris, an American citizen, is forced into hiding because she exercised her right to free speech. Will President Obama say a word on her behalf? Does he believe in the First Amendment for anyone other than Muslims?
Who knows? Given his highly selective enthusiasms, you can hardly blame a third of Americans for figuring their president must be Muslim. In a way, that's the least pathetic explanation: The alternative is that he's just a craven squish. Which is odd considering he is, supposedly, the most powerful man in the world.[snip]
It is a basic rule of life that if you reward bad behavior, you get more of it. Every time Muslims either commit violence or threaten it, we reward them by capitulating. Indeed, President Obama, Justice Breyer, General Petraeus, and all the rest are now telling Islam, you don’t have to kill anyone, you don’t even have to threaten to kill anyone. We’ll be your enforcers. We’ll demand that the most footling and insignificant of our own citizens submit to the universal jurisdiction of Islam. (more)
Submit to the universal jurisdiction of Islam, that's where we are headed? Sounds like our freedoms are not just at risk, but some are actually gone. Rabbi Lewis and Mark Steyn should get together, they would truly have a lot to talk about with the world is on fire and we must awake from our slumber.
With so many fine people like the Rabbi, Steyn Victor David Hansen and many others, ignorance of the situation is no excuse. Which brings us to the intent.
There are reasons why the Muslims act as they do, why their loyalties are to their own and against all others. There is no reason for Western democracies to submit to the Koran or Islamic ways, none.
In The Specter of Muslim Disloyalty in America, Raymond Ibrahim says:
Islamist enmity for infidels, regularly manifested in the jihad, is by now moderately well known. Lesser known, however, but of equal concern, is the mandate for Muslims to be loyal to fellow Muslims and Islam — a loyalty that all too often translates into disloyalty to all things non-Muslim, including the American people and their government.
This dichotomy of loyalty to Muslims and enmity for infidels — which, incidentally, corresponds well with Islamic law's division of the world into the abode of war (deserving of enmity) and the abode of Islam (deserving of loyalty) — is founded on a Muslim doctrine called wala' wa bara' (best translated as "loyalty and enmity"). I first encountered this doctrine while translating various Arabic documents for The Al Qaeda Reader. In fact, the longest and arguably most revealing document I included in that volume is titled "Loyalty and Enmity" (pgs.63-115), compiled by Aymen Zawahiri, al Qaeda's number two.
I say "compiled" because most of the words are direct quotes from the Koran, the Muslim prophet Muhammad, and Islam's jurists (i.e., this doctrine is not an "al-Qaeda" phenomenon but rather permeates the Islamicate worldview). [snip]
Mr. Ibrahim notes Nasser Abdo, an infantryman assigned to the 101st Airborne Division, who refuses to deploy to Afghanistan; major Nidal Hasan of the infamous Fort Hood killing spree; sergeant Hasan Akbar, who was convicted of murder for killing two American soldiers and wounding fourteen in a grenade attack in Kuwait who wrote in his diary: "I may not have killed any Muslims, but being in the army is the same thing. I may have to make a choice very soon on who to kill."
The next question must be, does this interpretation of the Koran and Islam apply only to those in the official military? Of course not.
As for all other instances that require Muslims to indicate their loyalty, the doctrine of taqiyya, which revolves around deceiving non-Muslims, offers relief, and is in fact essential for Muslim minorities living in America who want to uphold the doctrine of loyalty and enmity. [snip]
Moreover, it is one thing if the average American Muslim harbors loyalty to fellow Muslims, including terrorists such as al Qaeda, Hamas, and Hezbollah. It is quite another if that Muslim happens to be in a position of authority in the United States. This observation naturally leads to a president who up to 24% of Americans and many Muslims believe is a clandestine Muslim and who at least appears to have been raised a Muslim: Barrack Hussein Obama.
While there is no proof that he is a Muslim — indeed, no less an authority than Jeremiah Wright, the fellow who used to bellow "God damn America!" recently vouched for Obama's Christianity — the point here is simple: if an American president was a secret Muslim, and if he was lying about it, and even if he was secretly working to subvert the US to Islam's advantage — not only would such an approach comport with Islam's doctrines on loyalty and deception, but it would have ample precedents, stretching back to the dawn of Islam. Such as when Muhammad commanded one Na'im bin Mas'ud, a convert from an adversarial tribe that refused to submit to Islam, to conceal his new Muslim identity, go back to his tribe — which he cajoled with a perfidious "You are my stock and my family, the dearest of men to me" — only to betray them to Islam.
Appeasement to Islam intentional? I believe yes. Let us not just concentrate our sights on Barack Hussein Soetoro Obama, but also on the many Muslim, pro-Palestinian, pro-Hamas advisors, czars, etc. Obama surrounds himself with. Let us also concentrate on and beware of the new Muslim college and numerous Turkey sponsored Fethullah Gulen charter schools around the United States.
Let us also watch the ever increasing Left-leaning and appeasing media, civil liberties groups who care not for the civil liberties of all but mainly for the liberties on Islam. Let us continue to watch the lopsided acceptance of Jew and Christian bashing. Keep in mind that the United Nations is dominated by Israel and American (and Western in general) hating Muslims.
Let us be fully aware of the ever increasing hatred of Jews and Israel, Christians and the West by Muslims and by Left/Progressives. Dr. Phyllis Chesler has been writing about "a possible second Holocaust against the Jewish state for a long time now" and notes that "many of the distinguished academic presenters at Yale University’s superb conference on global anti-Semitism shared at least a part of this vision." Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad makes no secret he wants Israel wiped off the face of the earth. This week his Iranian First Vice-President Mohammad Reza Rahimi reiterated that the Zionist regime is the agent and representative of the Satan on the Earth.
Could anyone think that the direction the world is headed is simply to be blamed on ignorance alone? No. Intent. Cold, hard, well-planned intent. You don't have to know everything, but there is no excuse for not knowing this. With our own president at the head of the line leading this country in the wrong direction, it is imperative that we see the truth, that we follow the brave souls like Mark Steyn, Geert Wilders, the Rabbi Lewis, and so many more. Be sure to see El Taqiyya Presidente, by R.J. Godlewski.
We can stop the ignorance. We can reveal the intent, We can turn things around.
