Rebane's Ruminations
May 2011
S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  

ARCHIVES


OUR LINKS


YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

George Rebane

IslamMeetsWest Thank goodness, at last I’m not alone 😉  In these pages my commentaries on the resumed war between (radical) Islam and the West have met with some pretty hard criticism from our progressive brethren.  My assessments have been described as everything from lunacy to racism.  While I have never claimed a sole perch on this tenet, others have bestowed that upon me.

In regard to the war on Muslim terror, yesterday 3may11 the venerable Wall Street Journal again acknowledged that “we cannot forget that this is a war for national survival against enemies who would annihilate our cities if they could.” (emphasis mine)

I suppose my detractors will now argue that the WSJ is just playing catch-up with RR, even though I myself would take a more modest stance on such a conclusion.

[12may2011 update]  The debates in the comment stream to this post notwithstanding, I early on joined with those who saw the conflict between radical Islam and the West as something much larger than fragmented Muslim vendettas against the western countries for their alleged and acknowledged acts of imperialism.  My claim was that I agreed with the declared Islamists and their condoning silent majority.  Among these was the former head of Al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden.  As reported in the world’s leading journals it was bin Laden who “by framing the fight as a clash of civilizations, he could draw the West into a global war on terror.”  (The Economist, 7-13may11)

In the meanwhile it has been the constant and conspicuous labor of the left to minimize the scale and scope of this confrontation to the point of attempting to trivialize it into a series of disparate criminal activities.  As the conversation in the sequel reveals, the left is coming around to acknowledging the global import of radical Islam, and instead, is now citing a view of history highlighting the argument that the West had it coming.

The natural extension of this line of reasoning is that our proper response should be contrition in the extreme, doing everything we can not to aggravate or further irritate Muslims wherever they may be found – in their historical lands or in our midst.  All asymmetries in how the two cultures treat each other’s members should be ignored.  And since our culture is the guilty party, it falls on us to bend, comply, and comport ourselves properly so as to bring the matter to a peaceful conclusion acceptable to Islam.

Posted in ,

171 responses to “‘… war for national survival …’ (updated 12may2011)”

  1. Russ Steele Avatar

    The world is a better place with bin Laden feeding the fish at the bottom of the Persian Gulf, however it is important to recognize Al Qaeda just received new life from the martyrdom of the one man whose face has come to symbolize unwavering resistance to the Infidel. The killing of bin Laden promises to be a much greater incentive than anything that Bush did to encourage the recruitment radical Muslim terriorsts. It is critical to remember, this was not the end of the war on terror, but just the end of the first phase, the killing of Osama. Phase two will be the radical Muslim retaliation, and phase three will be eradication of those responsible, which will more than a single indivudual.

    Like

  2. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    When they killers come for the “progressives” the “progressives ” will be sure to try and make the killers know they are not dying because of racism.

    Like

  3. Mike Thornton Avatar

    Well, George, I’d like to take this opportunity to commend you for refraining from using the term “Raghead” and instead using a more accurate one, “radical” Islam. I think you’ve set the stage for the possibility of having an intelligent discussion on the subject.
    Hopefully some of your other readers will begin to follow your lead!

    Like

  4. RL Crabb Avatar

    Some years ago, I had a conversation with Mike Thornton about his trip to the middle east. I always like to get info from people who actually have some experience with Muslims, since I don’t.
    As I recall, Mike described a place that was quite diverse, like anywhere on this planet. It could hardly be said that everyone held the same opinion, although some of it sounded pretty scary. In some cases you could be killed for asking the wrong person the wrong question.
    Let’s hope that the ‘Arab Spring’ revolutions will produce an electorate that is more interested in catching up with the rest of the world rather than carrying on thousand-year-old grudges.

    Like

  5. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    The radical Muslims still watch “Crusader Rabbit” cartoons. We have moved on to X-Men.

    Like

  6. Mike Thornton Avatar

    Todd: What does a comment like that add to actually trying to deal with the situation?
    As far as the Middle East is concerned, you’re right Bob! (At least that was my experience)
    I met all kinds of people with different views.
    I walked into a hotel in Damascus on the morning that Saddam Hussein’s trial started and I sat watching the proceedings with two Syrian bellhops. Another guy asked me why we (the US) didn’t just hang him and get it over with, because everyone in the region knew that was what was going to happen and that the guy had it coming.
    While there is definitely a different relationship to religion in the Middle East than there is in the “West”, I think it’s reasonable to say that many Muslims approach their religion the same way that many Christians do. They are born into families that have a certain “religion: and they are raised with that framework, but are really much more concerned with the tasks of daily life that we all face. They have hopes and dreams for themselves, their families, their children and their communities. Most people in the US know very little about the rest of the world and so they fear a lot of it. Some of it should be feared, but most of it not!
    I traveled in Syria, Israel, the West Bank and Lebanon and the only time I was actually “afraid’ was in the Shattila, Palestinian Refugee camp in Beirut and that was because the place was the worst ghetto I have ever been in by one hundred fold (and I’ve lived in some pretty tough places) full of 6 generations of angry frustrated people.
    It was a scary place.
    I’ve got hours worth of stories about this stuff!

    Like

  7. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    Metaphorical humor.
    Regarding the “Muslims” and there aspirations. And I do find you placing the word west in para’s kind of inrteresting.
    Traveling to foreign countries as a tourist is something many of us have done. I have hours of stories myself. I simply say the difference between a religion that says anyone who isn’t a believer in Allah will be sent off the planet. Read Jefferson’s War and you will see the man had the same problem with these folks as the world has today. Christianity is a religion of peace, the Koran is a book of violence.

    Like

  8. Dixon Cruickshank Avatar
    Dixon Cruickshank

    The mideast has for hundreds of years been a very violent and tribal arena – they won’t forget because Jimmy Carter stops in for a chat.
    Wonder if 15 families did move to Nevada City and next thing you know they are all on the sidewalk in front of all the wine shops protesting – anybody locals want to try that on.
    They come to change and colonise, not to assimilate

    Like

  9. Steve Enos Avatar
    Steve Enos

    “Christianity is a religion of peace”?… seems some one does not know his history.

    Like

  10. George Rebane Avatar
    George Rebane

    Mr Thornton – I look forward to more of your insights and experiences garnered from your travels in the Muslim world.
    Among my friends I also count Muslims and a Sikh. A major concern about the non-militant, mildly Muslim around the world is how they will react to a militant Islamic majority gaining power where they live. Will they just fall in and become enthusiastic supporters of the new regime that gives them purpose and direction, or …?
    In recent history the reaction of the Christian Germans to Nazism is worth pondering. None of them were indoctrinated in national socialism, let alone being rabid ideologues of that movement. They were a very civilized and serious people going about their business and rebuilding their country from the deprivations of WW1 and its blockaded aftermath. No one thought much of Hitler and his brown shirts.
    However, after Hitler became Chancellor and the Nazis assumed power, they would be almost instantly turned into supporters of the new ideology and regime in their daily lives and workplaces. And this support redoubled with patriotic fervor once the country went to war. For almost all Germans it truly was then ‘Deutschland über Alles!’
    How would the Muslim street react in similar situations? What effect on such possible reaction will the current ‘Arab Spring’ have?

    Like

  11. Mike Thornton Avatar

    I was hardly a “tourist”, Todd.
    Have you read the Christian Bible lately? It clearly says that if you don’t believe in Allah (since it is all the same God)that the violence you’ll experience will come from the hand of Allah (himself)and will be more than a human being can even imagine.
    Christians have slaughtered and enslaved hundreds of millions of people in the name of the God of “Abraham”, so it’s just a little more complicated then you present it as.
    As far as Muslims coming to “change and colonize” I’ve been to SALAM Mosque in Sacramento on several occasions and have never once seen Muslims protesting anything in the area. I challenge you to present verifiable evidence that there have been any of the type of protest as described by Mr. Cruickshank in the Sacramento area!

    Like

  12. George Rebane Avatar
    George Rebane

    According to Christ’s teachings, Christianity IS a religion of peace. God’s wrath on Man in the Bible is not to be confused with God compelling man-on-man violence.
    All of this is independent (semantically orthogonal) to how Christians have behaved. As I have noted in these pages, historically Christians have been the world’s most prodigious killers. The exception to that came in the 20th century when collectivist totalitarian dictators, who were also atheists, killed their own citizens in unimaginable numbers. Christians now seem to be a confused lot – people ignorant of their religion, cultural history, and seeking a direction that does not draw much attention to itself.
    And to keep things on track – DixonC did not claim that such protets have occurred. He implied that such protests have occurred in other places (Great Britain and Germany come to mind) where Muslims have clearly declared that they are settlers in a new land, and not assimilating immigrants.

    Like

  13. Mike Thornton Avatar

    I think you raise important questions, George!
    I’m actually reading a very interesting book entitled “Red Orchestra” about the rise of Nazism and the various resistance efforts that were taking place.
    In general, I think there is a tremendous amount of rage and shame in the Arab world. There is also a lot of learned helplessness, which has been greatly aided by colonization and the support of brutal authoritarian regimes by the Western Powers. This has left millions of people vulnerable to the Bin Ladens of the world, who promise a resurgence of pride through a return to past glory days (as was much the case with Hitler)
    My experience working in the mental health field has taught me that you don’t get “Shame Based” people to behave differently/better by continuing to shame them and trying to beat them into submission, but by giving them a viable alternative instead.
    As Crabb pointed out earlier, the so-called “Arab Spring” can be a real opportunity for the West to do something positive now.
    It’s a complicated situation and needs to be approached with intelligence, nuance and real strength. Not simplistic bluster and brute force.

    Like

  14. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    I have a slew of things I could say about Jamaica, Mexico and some other places regarding there governments, religions and ways of life, but I won’t. A tourist’s view is skewed because they are simply that, a tourist.
    Yes historical Christianity was a deadly and brutal religion, mostly in the hands of the Catholics and the Pope. It is my view that since the late 1900’s the rise of evangelical Christians has utilized the New Testament as its guide. This reflects the current view of Christianity as a religion of peace. I am quite fascinated though with atheists and agnostics who always tell us what we are when they don’t have a clue. It does provide us a good laugh.

    Like

  15. Mike Thornton Avatar

    So what we’re saying here is that there has been great violence done in the name of “God” and by people who don’t believe in “God” for all of “Man’s” history and more often then not the actual reasons for all of this death and enslavement had little to do with “Religion” other than it was what was used as the justification/rationalization, correct?
    truthfully it would be a relief if modern Christians in America actually used the “New Testament” as their guide as Todd states! Unfortunately, there seems to be a tendency on the part of the most vocal “Christians” to profess their faith in Jesus as they quote the Old Testament” for justification/rationalization of a bunch of hate and bigotry.
    George, I beg to differ regarding the Cruikshank comment, what was being done was more fear mongering. “Oh what will happen if….”, but it isn’t happening and in an area right near Nevada City where there are thousands of Muslims and several Masjids it hasn’t happened there either!

    Like

  16. RL Crabb Avatar

    So what is your answer, Todd? Kill ’em all and let God sort them out? Seems like you don’t want to even make an effort at anything else.
    I have a lot of gripes with Islam. My profession has suffered a great deal because of the radicals. But I still refuse to see the Muslims as one entity, all evil.

    Like

  17. Mike Thornton Avatar

    I know this is (only slightly) off topic, but I’m listening to tape from several right wing talk radio hosts who are claiming that (a) The Navy Seals (possibly) didn’t actually kill Osama and that his own bodyguards did (b) That Obama is a “war criminal” for killing Osama in Pakistan and (c) Glenn beck is complaining that poor Osama was killed even though he was “unarmed”!
    This is “ODS” (Obama Derangement Syndrome)absolutely run amok!
    The right wing hates Obama so much, that they are willing to take the side of Osama Bin Laden over our own President.
    I’d sure like to hear what the Republican and Tea Party leadership has to say about this!

    Like

  18. Mike Thornton Avatar

    You’ve got the right approach, Bob!
    We need to isolate the “radicals” from Islam as a whole.
    If the radicals continue to attack and kill, then we and others need to do whatever it takes to stop them from doing so.
    On the other hand we can’t keep killing innocent Muslims and expect them not to react.
    We also can’t keep poking Islam in the eye, by burning the Quran, calling them “Ragheads” (regardless of the rationalization) and I would argue that there is a line (albeit fine) between legitimate political cartooning and images that are simply designed to inflame and provoke violent reaction.
    We have to stand up for our values and principles, but we also have to be smart and appropriately sensitive to the situation.

    Like

  19. RL Crabb Avatar

    Yes, but I would like to know where that fine line is. Is the act of portraying the prophet a killing offense? This is where the so-called mainstream Muslims lose me.
    I’ve cited the example of the young female cartoonist from Seattle who advocated “Let’s All Draw Mohammad Day” here and in my cartoon before. She was forced to go underground for some time because of threats on her life. (Her rationale being that they couldn’t kill ALL the cartoonists, right?)
    Even Salman Rushdie, in today’s ‘Daily Beast’ says that maybe it’s time we quit pussyfooting around with Pakistan and treat them like a terrorist nation. It was Rushdie who once said, “Freedom of expression…without the freedom to offend, it ceases to exist.”
    So I’m willing to Islam a little slack, but I will never bow to censorship for the sake of political correctness.

    Like

  20. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    Well golly gee, what is the answer? Hmmm. I agree the Islamo-fascists terrorist should be isolated and taken out, but golly gee, how does that happen? The Muslim street protects them. Look at Britain and Germany, the bad guys are protected and the authorities have a hard time penetrating the communities. So, maybe we could pay them off., Like the Mafia but in reverse. We could give them a stipend like say $25 bucks a month to not kill us. If you want to draw a cartoon of Mohamed, I will be the first to speak of your heroism at your funeral. They will Van Gogh you and you know it. The best solution we thought would work was education. Doctors, lawyers, yada yada yada. Well They seem to be willing to jihad us too (Isn’t Zawahiri a doc?). Even the protected murderer of our troops at Ft. Hood was educated and lived here for many years. Islam-fascism trumped everything in him. So keep up your Pollyanna but if you don’t show strength and power, these folks will be your masters someday.

    Like

  21. Dixon Cruickshank Avatar
    Dixon Cruickshank

    Lots of different facets to Islam Mr Thornton just like christianity. It only takes a small group that believes in shara law and practices a strict belief, of course that is not all of them. There are many neighborhoods in Briton and France that christians are not welcome in, let alone if your jewish. In Britan recently, which is what popped into my mind, a clothing store was forced to move because of relentless protests out front. It also hurt the other business’es nearby, this went on for years, so it was only kinda hypothetical.

    Like

  22. George Rebane Avatar
    George Rebane

    “Freedom of expression…without the freedom to offend, it ceases to exist.” Deep thought and oh so true. Thanks for sharing Bob.
    MikeT (I feel like I’m finally beginning to know you), the connections you make from DixonC’s comment, and inferring that the right is “taking the side of Osama bin Laden” are for me too difficult to follow.
    And you still accuse me of calling ALL of Islam ragheads, when I have only used that appellation for designating the fanatical murderers of innocents – both infidels and Muslims – clearly a small but effective contingent of Islam. I have the strong feeling that you can differentiate that use, but don’t know exactly why you are returning to the blanket assertion.

    Like

  23. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    George, Muslims call everyone else on the planet who are not them, infidels. Would that be a racist comment? Just wondering.

    Like

  24. George Rebane Avatar
    George Rebane

    Racism is now a meaningless (in the sense that no coherent definition of it exists) pejorative hung by the left on anyone they don’t like for any reason. Sort of like some rightwingers calling everyone to their left communists.
    http://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2010/07/who-is-a-racist.html
    Yes indeed, Islam does divide the world into Muslims and infidels (“those without faith”).

    Like

  25. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    I was just curious since I never read these socalled “outraged” liberals condemning them for what I would call racism from the Muslims.

    Like

  26. Mike Thornton Avatar

    George, I’m using your use of “Raghead” as an example, not as an “accusation”. My point is that we need to understand what we’re doing and why.
    You can split all the hairs you want, but what the Arab world sees and hears is “Raghead”, if you think that helps find a way toward some sort of peaceful resolution to the problem, more power to you.
    Bob, As you (likely) know, Islam prohibits visual depictions of the Prophet under any and all circumstances. I’m not saying that people who are not Muslim should in any way be bound by that or that Islam should be exempt from criticism or political analysis regardless of the medium. but ask yourself this question: What is the point of “Everybody Draw Muhammad Day”? Is it to use art as a way of exploring Islam or pointing out some social/political contradiction or hypocrisy or is it: “We know this is really going to piss you off and we’re going to do it because we can.”? Is refraining from doing something like that bowing to “PC” or is it “Man, things are really bad and maybe we should try to build a few bridges with these folks, before we start poking them in the eye again.”?
    Dixon, if you want to say that there are some areas of the world, where new cultures are moving in and kicking the existing cultures out, what’s new about that? Should people be able to stand up for their neighborhoods and say “No, we live here too!”?, Of course they should be able too! But do you ever consider the fact that European Christianity has done, exactly the same thing all over the world? Yes, the difference is that, up til now, we’ve pretty much “kicked ass” on the entire world and there has been nothing they could do to stop it. When they tried, they were killed!
    If you really want to worry, about a cultural paradigm shift, look to China.
    But since our country is being run by and for the capitalist investor class at the moment, pretty much all they see are dollar signs and the belief they’ll be able to overcome Chinese Nationalism, with Tommy Hilfiger stores and Brittney Spears CDs.
    I just don’t know why, the idea of approaching things with something other than a sledgehammer, while waving the flag and taking marching orders from Rush Limbaugh seems to be such a difficult concept for so many folks on the right to get?
    And why, not only do so many of you not seem to get it, but you just can’t seem to cope with anybody who can.

    Like

  27. George Rebane Avatar
    George Rebane

    MikeT – good point on raghead and reaching a “peaceful resolution”. My intent was not that its use would serve that purpose, but display and motivate in us an animus to resist the self-proclaimed Islamic onslaught.
    All evidence that I have shows that militant Islam has a pretty brutal agenda with regard to the west – sort of like the Christian Great Commission on steroids. And by their own words they show nothing but contempt when we respond to them with rapprochement, they see it as a confirming weakness. This is not unusual for a culture that is about 600 years ‘behind’ the west and advanced Asian civilizations. Would welcome thoughts and references that contend this view.
    ‘Everybody draw Muhammad Day’ appears to have been another version of ‘raghead’ to indicate the in-your-face strength of the west. Its wisdom, as of ‘raghead’, is up for debate.
    Finally, to me your connecting the two independent notions of standing up to Islam and the West’s history of colonization belong under the ‘Sunk Costs Don’t Count’ argument that I recently posted.

    Like

  28. RL Crabb Avatar

    I’ve never done a drawing of Big Mo just for the sake of drawing him, but keep in mind that the seattle cartoonist was targeted for just suggesting it. Also, if Muslims want to live in a free country, then they are expected to deal with criticism just like everyone else. What they do in their own countries is their problem. (I’m sure you’ve seen the videos of women being stoned to death.) The idea of coming here is to escape the kind of persecution they get at home.
    The Muslim community needs to look in the mirror and decide whether they want to live in the 21st Century or the 12th. I’m hoping that the ‘Arab Spring’ is a step in that direction.

    Like

  29. Mike Thornton Avatar

    Once again, George, I believe there is a big difference and a bigger gap between “militant” and “mainstream” Islam than most people in “The West” realize.
    I met with a “progressive” Muslim scholar in Damascus Mohammad Habasch, who told me that the vast majority of Muslims are what he called “conservative” and that generally, they don’t care one way or another about non-Muslims, since they believe that we’re all going to Hell anyway. They don’t want to hang out with us, but they don’t want to fight with us either.
    The most militant Muslims are the “Wahhabi” and they are most prevalent in Saudi Arabia. They are largely the ones who believe that non-Muslims should be killed, but at the same time believe that the Muslims that don’t believe as they do are for all intents and purposes “Non-Muslims” as well. I find it interesting that for all of the Muslim countries we do attack for their alleged threat to “Western Civilization”, we leave “The Kingdom” untouched….
    To me the real question is: “Do we want to find a way to peacefully coexist with the Muslim World or to we want to defeat them and impose Western capitalism upon them”?
    Depending on what the answer to that question is, the strategy and tactics are worlds apart.
    And I wonder what you mean by “standing up to Islam”? It sounds like you believe that we ARE at war with a religion that has over 2 Billion adherents. If that’s true, why is that?
    I think you’re misunderstanding my point about the West’s history of colonization.
    Everything happens in a context and in much of the rest of the world, not just the Middle East, the history of that colonization and the brutality that went with it, is hardly “old news”, those wounds are pretty raw. And while we may want to forget about our past murderous excesses, most people in the world haven’t and that includes many in the Native American and African American communities within our own borders.

    Like

  30. Mike Thornton Avatar

    I think we’re talking past each other Bob.
    I’m not saying that people should be forced to abide by Islam’s rules on anything.
    I’m simply saying that, you can go back 1000+ years and see example after example of attacks on the religion of Islam and the people who believe in it. I’ve seen some of the Crusader Forts, with my own eyes and read the treatises attacking “Mahound” that were sanctioned by the European Christian Church.
    Here’s what I know. I think you’re a pretty good and reasonable guy, but if I found out what was the most sacred thing you believed in and I kept attacking it and you, over and over and over, sooner or later you’d get pretty pissed off about it, right?
    Now in all likelihood, you’d just say “To hell with this guy, I won’t have anything to do with him anymore!”, But what if I kept it up and kept it up and then camped out in your front yard and drawing offensive cartoons on your house, throwing rocks at your kids and then set your house on fire and killed a couple of your relatives?
    My guess is, that the shotgun would have already come out.
    Would I then be justified in saying “That Bob, he just needs to stop being so friggin sensitive!”
    Now, if things had gotten that bad and i wanted to try and clean things up with you, would looking for another way to insult you be the best way to achieve that?

    Like

  31. RL Crabb Avatar

    Every one of us come from a history of oppression, whether we know it or not. Some of our ancestors came to this country for economic opportunity, but I’d wager that most came here to escape tyranny in their mother countries. Even though there is a history of racism and intolerance here, most of us have gotten over it.
    You could look at India as an example, also. The British were ruthless overlords, but today India is climbing out of the cycle of hate and becoming a modern nation. And while I agree that Israel has been brutal and unjust in their treatment of the Palestinians, can you imagine how much different things would be today if the Arab population had followed the teachings of Gandhi instead of violence?
    They need to get over the past, if they want to have a future.

    Like

  32. Mike Thornton Avatar

    Agreed.
    And we have to do what we can to help them.
    I’m simply arguing that a lot of what we’ve been doing, not only doesn’t help, but actually makes things worse.
    I also think there are (some) folks who know that and profit from the situation and that would include many in the Arab world as well!

    Like

  33. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    You two should sit down and watch Lawrence of Arabia. Great music.

    Like

  34. Mike Thornton Avatar

    I have the DVD sitting on my living room table at this very moment.

    Like

  35. Larry Wirth Avatar
    Larry Wirth

    Mike T, have you actually read the Koran? If you have, please inform us of the “takeaway” message. If you haven’t yet had that pleasure, please do so now (choose an Arab translation) and report back here on what you’ve learned.
    Your historical ignorance of the Islamic world is stunning, if not breathtaking. For the record, there seem to be about 1.5 billion Muslims on the planet at present, not “more than two billion.” You can look it up, y’know?
    In re: colonialism, the Muslims of the Hijaz were the world’s original colonialists, pouring out of Arabia on Muhammed’s command in the 7th Century and overrunning much of classical Christiandom until stopped in France in 722. That was the only “golden age” of Islam. The crusades of three hundred years later were an attempt to keep Islam from overwhelming the Byzantine Empire that had been under Islamic assault since the Muslim founding. It was only partially successful and no part of the Islamic world
    was “colonized” as a result.
    The second great colonial power was that of the Ottoman Turks who regained most, but not all of the original Islamic emipire, by “colonizing” the original colonialists.
    As that ordered crumbled, only in the late 19th and early 20th Centuries, particularly following WWII, then and only then, was any part of the Muslim heartland “colonized,” and in most cases was comparatively brief. The exception was India, where the British ousted the Muslim tyranny beginning in the late 17th Century.
    France tried the “settler” bit in Algeria, starting in 1830, but to suggest that the Muslims have been “scarred” by “Western colonialism” betrays a near-complete lack of education in the subject you are attempting to address. If you’d like a bibliograpy to enhance your understanding, just say so, but in the meantime, start by reading the Koran.

    Like

  36. Mike Thornton Avatar

    I actually have a copy of the Quran in Arabic, English and Tranliterated Arabic.
    First Muhammad fought with his fellow Arabs and and then moved out to indeed conquer neighboring empires and then begin to expand the Ummah as you so state. Making there way to Southern Spain. I’ve never said that they were “pacifists”! The fact is however that European Christians invaded the “Holy” Land in an effort to conquer it (or if it makes you feel better to re-conquer it) That still doesn’t change the facts regarding the European invasions and colonization of the Arab world, which continued (after the Ottomans) into the 20th and 21st Centuries as well as the support of brutal Arab dictators and continued invasions to this very moment. So it seems that what you want to have is a history, where only the Muslims are the “bad guys”
    As far as the take away message of the Quran it’s the same as The Bible, believe what we believe or burn in Hell for eternity.
    I reject the message in both books!

    Like

  37. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    Excellent Wirth!

    Like

  38. Larry Wirth Avatar
    Larry Wirth

    Mike T, if you have read your Korans, you will know that the take away message is quite different from that of the Bible. True believers of both faiths do indeed think that “infidels” (for that is also what the Crusaders called their opponents) will burn in Hell. The difference is that the Koran actively and repetitiously incites its followers to accelerate the process by killing them. Christians and Jews are given a third choice of dhimmitude (second class citizenship or even slavery), but for all others, the command is “our way or the grave.”
    And both history and current events testify that Muslims take those Koranic commands seriously. From the death of “the prophet” until the end of the tenth Century, Islam waged non-stop agressive war against the Christian and Hindu worlds although it was less successful in the East. The crusades came at a time when the original caliphate was in a state of advanced decay, but Islam recovered the Holy Land in less than a Century. When first the Seljuks and later the Ottomans wrested political power in the Islamic world from the Arabs, the perpetual state of war against Christiandom was resumed right down to the
    1678 siege of Vienna.
    The Ottomans were slowly forced onto the defensive as the Christian peoples of SE Europe reclaimed their independence in the 19th Century, but the period after 1678 did not see any colonization of the Muslim world until the Frence moved into Algeria.
    While the Turks were a particular target of the Russians, the Ottoman Empire survived until 1923 when it was dismembered following a catastrophic defeat in World War I. The Arab portions were not colonized, they were given in trust to Britain and France to be administered until sufficient infrastructure could be put into place. That process was essentially complete by the eve of World War II, less than twenty years. So please don’t mislead people by suggesting that Trans-Jordan, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Palestine were “colonies” in the usual sense of the word.
    And now, after a weakness-induced 3 Centuries of being on the defensive, the Muslim world has resumed the offensive. This isn’t a reflection of mere orneriness, it is scripturally enjoined, as you know.

    Like

  39. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    Lets not forget the countries of Pakistan and Bangladesh were part of India either. Look at them today. Kashmir, and other areas of disagreement, all driven by religion.
    Today’s Union has a news story about how the people of India let their baby girls die for mostly economic reasons (dowry;s). The part that interests me about this is the liberals flock to the “peaceful” religion of Hindus.

    Like

  40. Dixon Cruickshank Avatar
    Dixon Cruickshank

    Great stuff Wirth – I worked in an office with a Greek that his family went through the Ottoman era having their land and village taken and given to the muslums of Albainia, I believe they killed his grandfather as he was head of the village. They don’t forget, the Serbs didn’t either, after the fall of the SU – this guy, his father and cousins went back across the border and literially threw the Albainian mayor out of their old family house at 6am – great story.
    The way he explains it, whom ever has the power goes back and kicks the chit out of the last guys that did it. Yes it does go back to the 12th century

    Like

  41. George Rebane Avatar
    George Rebane

    Good history lesson LarryW. If I may just shorten it for the disinterested reader; the Muslims began their invasion of Europe at Cordoba (now Spain)in 711 and stayed in the Iberian Peninsula until 1492. Invading through the Balkans they finally reached Vienna and were defeated there in 1683 (with the help of the Poles), but were only pushed back to the Balkans where they remain to this day. The Crusades were a temporary interlude.
    The Muslim vs Christians conflicts are very one-sided with the Muslims being the perpetrators of conquest, and its most successful benefactors to this day. Anything else is historical revisionism with an agenda.

    Like

  42. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    I just love historical facts.

    Like

  43. Paul Emery Avatar
    Paul Emery

    Since we are on a history track let’s spend some time looking at the Middle East since WWII Let’s start with Iran. Mohammad Mosaddegh was the democratically elected Prime Minister of Iran from 1951 to 1953 when he was overthrown in a coup orchestrated by the United States Central Intelligence Agency. This is undisputed modern history. The reason for the coup was to support British Petroleum in their trade dispute the sovereign nation of Iran. He was replaced by the US sponsored dictator the Shah of Iran. At this point I will not get into details about the brutality of his police state. He ruled with an iron hand till deposed by the Ayatollah Khomeini that leads us to our current situation.
    Imagine the feelings if in our country Harry Truman would have been ousted by a Iranian led coup in 1953 and replaced by a Iranian controlled dictator. This is modern history and is still alive today in the everyday lives stories of the people of Iran. This is only one example of why the West is feared and hated in that region. We have to take some responsibility for the situation in the Middle East if we hope to have any understanding of current events. Religion had nothing to do with this situation.

    Like

  44. George Rebane Avatar
    George Rebane

    Well stated Paul, and I won’t argue with your development exceept only to inject that at the time the US and USSR were in contention for that oil-rich country. Today we know that Brezhnev would probably have done something similar had we not (Exhibit A: Afghanistan). And no one has claimed that religion was a factor. But be that as it may.
    But the discussion here is the undeniable contention between the west and Islam. This is not an invention of my fevered brain, but acknowledged by almost everyone in the world except America’s lamestream.
    You presented a vignette about Iran. Could you tie this to the larger issue please?

    Like

  45. Paul Emery Avatar
    Paul Emery

    That’s a reasonable question so I’ll do the best I can. I composed a detailed response but it disappeared due to a miss click si it’s gone forever. As I recall it was quite brilliant but we’ll never know. Here is a simplified version.
    Religious fever and extremism becomes focused on us (and I mean all outside intruders including the State of Israel because we’re there. We’re there because we have to be to maintain our material needs and Empire. If we weren’t there there would not have been 9/11. Why are we there? Because of our national interests not because we like the weather. These are sovereign nations and cultures. We are outsiders. I suggest you read “God’s Terrorists” by Charles Allen to understand the motivations and roots of modern Jihad.
    http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/reviews/gods-terrorists-by-charles-allen-468226.html

    Like

  46. George Rebane Avatar
    George Rebane

    Paul, it seems that you’re saying that losing Vienna in 1683 changed the aims and goals of Islam forever. From that day onward Islam became content to remain within its borders, and it was the rapacity of the west that reawakened its desire for following the Quran’s dictates to make the world Islamic and establish the Caliphate (in their own words). Ergo we are at fault for 9/11, its preambles and aftermath.
    I can’t make that connection, but even if I could, I would still oppose their onslaught and defend western culture.

    Like

  47. Dixon Cruickshank Avatar
    Dixon Cruickshank

    Paul sorry thats way too 20th century – this all goes back hundreds of years, just listen to the muslums they are way back there.

    Like

  48. Dixon Cruickshank Avatar
    Dixon Cruickshank

    These were the angry scenes across Pakistan today as Muslims staged protests against the killing of Al Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden.
    Hundreds of people marched through Multan, burning U.S. flags and waving placards as they warned the terrorist’s death could produce many more radical figures to take his place.
    It comes after crowds of weeping mourners were pictured offering funeral prayers for the Al Qaeda mastermind widely blamed for thousands of deaths at 9/11.
    I guess we just don’t understand how senitive they are, I guess send them a couple billion and have all of us take a senitivity class and it will all work out for us.
    The least we could do is offer the groups free plane tickets to Grass Valley, and have Todd build them some free houses, and have Mali get a goat farm up and running – the weather is probably much nicer, they would love it.

    Like

  49. Paul Emery Avatar
    Paul Emery

    George, Dixon
    You’re opening a huge issue here about the role of religion in nationalistic expansion by framing this discussion back to the 17th Century. Is it fair game to bring into the discussion the role of the Catholic Church in the conquest and slavery of the Native populations in South America for the benefit of their nationalistic sponsors? People have been hacking each other up for thousands of years in the name of religions of all kind so I don’t see your point of diverting the discussion by attributing something uniquely violent to the religion of Islam. It was the Holy Roman Empire that conquered and destroyed the Celtic people of Europe and the British Isles for example. It was the determination that the Island of Ireland needed to be conquered and possessed by Britain as an outpost of the Holy Roman Empire because of a ruling from the Pope in Rome that the Ireland needed to be under their divine protection. That led to 800 years of British rule and the slaughter of thousands of native Irish. This is just an example of Christian expansion through military conquest. They had god on their side. Need I go on and on.
    Do we have any responsibility today for our national policy that led to the coup in Iran for example. That only happened 50 years ago. That coup led to the deaths of thousands through the firing squads of the Shah of Iran, our guy.
    This does not justify 9/11 but might shed some light on the root causes of militant Islam.

    Like

  50. wmartin Avatar
    wmartin

    ” It was the Holy Roman Empire that conquered and destroyed the Celtic people of Europe and the British Isles for example.”
    LOL. Say what?

    Like

Leave a comment