Islam, we are told over and over again by the self-appointed guardians of righteous thinking, is not a religion of violence and aggression but of peace and love. Does not the Koran have at the head of every chapter: 'In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate'? Who could disagree with that? That's the sentiment of all decent people everywhere isn't it?
How can people be so naïve and stupid?
Very easily it seems, almost a mandatory qualification, since it makes it easier to spew out sanctimonious drivel with a straight face. But where are the doubting voices, the posers of awkward questions that might expose this ludicrous charade for the convenient nonsense it is? Certainly not the TV interviewers and ambitious journalists with careers to think about, who in any case know no more about the subject than the people they are interviewing, and are every bit as keen to appear 'tolerant' and 'understanding' for fear of something nasty happening on their own doorsteps.
Here are a few questions that might be put to them or any other apologist for Islam.
(1) If real Islam is all about peace and love, how did it acquire an empire that stretched from Spain to India, by sweet reason?
(2) When is Islam going to apologize for overrunning the Hellenic-Christian civilization of the Middle East, conquering Constantinople in 1453, and laying siege to Vienna in 1529?
(3) If the Koran is all about peace and love, how are such verses as the following to be explained? K.4:74, 'Let those fight in the cause of God who sell the life of this world for the hereafter. To him who fights in the cause of God, whether he is slain or victorious, soon we shall give him a great reward'. K.4:76, 'Those who believe fight in the cause of God, and those who reject faith fight in the cause of evil.' K.5:54, 'O believers, take not Jews and Christians as friends, they are friends of each other. Those of you who make them his friends are one of them. God does not guide an unjust people.' K.9:29, 'Fight those who believe neither in God nor the Last Day, nor what has been forbidden by God and his messenger (Muhammad), nor acknowledge the religion of Truth (Islam), even if they are People of the Book (Jews and Christians), until they pay the tribute and have been humbled.' K.47:4, 'When you meet the unbelievers, smite their necks, then when you have made wide slaughter among them, tie fast the bonds, then set them free, either by grace or ransom, until the war lays down its burdens.'
It is not difficult to see how those who regard the Koran as God's own speech can find in verses such as these the justification for practically any act of 'terrorism' imaginable. When such texts are put to apologists the usual response is to say that they are bad translations and it is quite different in the Arabic, and in any case such verses are balanced or cancelled by other meliorating texts elsewhere in the Koran. Unfortunately, according to the traditional Muslim chronology of revelation, early texts are abrogated by apparently contradictory later texts, and all the above texts are late or 'Medinan', while most of the 'compassionate' texts are early or 'Meccan'. It has been said that the text at K.9:5, 'Slay the idolaters wherever you find them', cancels 124 verses advocating mercy and toleration.
There is no Pope in Islam, no ultimate authority able to say what real Islam is, or what is the right interpretation of texts, there is just and endless spectrum of opinion. Those involved in recent events, wearing red head -bands emblazoned with texts such as those above, have every right to consider themselves real Muslims going about God's work and deserving reward in the hereafter. Indeed, such people probably have more right to consider themselves good Muslims than those Western educated, Western suited, representatives of Muslim institutions expressing sympathy and regret, or any benignly smiling Sufi talking about 'the heart'; the latter are especially nauseating in that they share many of the aims of the militants, such as the restoration of the caliphate, without the courage to do anything about it.
It is important that such things are said loudly and said now, since it is likely that before long both the writer and the publisher of these words could be deemed guilty of the crime of inciting religious hatred. So widespread are such sentiments amongst the liberal intelligentsia that it is surprising that there have not yet been mass conversions. In contrast, outside such circles, it appears that either Islam is true, in which case we all ought to be Muslims, or it is not true, in which case it is pernicious nonsense and it cannot be criminal to say so.
We are constantly told that we are not engaged in a war against Islam, but why not a war against Islam? Why not a war against that billion of the world's population bound in benighted ignorance and superstition? Why not a war against a world-view diametrically opposed to all those democratic values that it is supposed to hold so dear? Why not?
Because Western Civilization is led for the most part by evangelical nincompoops, one with messianic delusions, more than half in love with what in their muddled minds they like to think real Islam is, and what in their dreams they would like the West to be - God-fearing, Bible-reading, Church-going, a land of inanely grinning communitarians whose highest value is that their pathetic little egos strut about the world stage for as long as possible.
We are also told that the events of September 11th were not a clash of civilizations or world-views, but that is exactly what they were. It was not by chance that the twin towers of the World Trade Centre were the first to go. In the minds of many Muslims tall buildings are the ultimate symbol of infidel pride and arrogance and defiance of Allah, especially evident in the end times before the final reckoning. The fact that they were also temples of usury and symbols of the economic power with which Jews and Christians undermine and exploit the Muslim world can only have added to the satisfaction of bringing them down, especially when it was achieved by just ten men wielding pen knives. That there were Muslims in the building at the time is of no consequence, since their fate was already sealed by K.5:54 and K.9:29 quoted above.
The purpose of the attack on Afghanistan we are told is to bring about 'justice', as if there were some cross-cultural consensus on what any such word means.
The only relevant question to be asked about 'justice' is: Whose justice, mine or yours, ours or theirs, man's or God's? Where did that law originate, who invented it, with what purpose in mind? What kind of world did it come from and what kind of world was it intended to bring about?
Certainly not that where Muslim justice held solid for almost 1400 years.
It is not without significance that 'infinite justice', the original name for the attack, had to be changed since it unwittingly usurped one of the Koranic names of God, it was replaced with the favorite shibboleth from the Western lexicon of praise: 'infinite freedom'.
The world needs to wake up and rapidly appreciate that whether we like it or not we are at war with Islam, but this war we did not declare, it was declared for us, upon us by the enemy, just as Japan did so many years ago.
They paid dearly for that mistake.
The world, those countries that harbor such sentiment, provide safe havens for known radicals and terrorist, support them and encourage them should be held accountable.
It’s either them, or us and I will not go quietly into the night.
Weasel
But it ain't gonna happen. Actually considering that about 90% of all current combat in the world is taking place over religious differences (include tribal strife IMHO) maybe we should just outlaw religion? Muslims against Jews, Christians against Muslims, Animists against Christians, Muslims against Hindus, even Christians against Christians (Bosnia). D@mn ... I'm glad I'm Buddhist, we've never had a 'religious' war. Oh wait ... I forgot about Sri Lanka. Sh!t. Oh well ... I guess that's all of us.
