The War on Islam

The key to winning the war on Islam is tell the truth. And the truth is: Islam is evil. The truth is: Muslims are monsters.

The point that needs to be made is moderate Islam is evil. The point that needs to be made is average Muslims are monsters.

From the beginning five years ago today, the followers of Mohammed (death be upon him) have been saying one thing consistently worldwide: "This is a war against Islam."

And they're right. In their own crude, simplistic, too-stupid-to-lie way, they're right.

When we fight our absurdly and bastardly named "war on terror" what we're really (lamely) attacking and really (pitifully) opposing is the aggressive warfare of jihad and the fascist tyranny of sharia. And these two are the essence of Islam. It is not "the five pillars." (I. e. Visit Mecca, repeat the motto, fast for a month, pray five times daily, give to charity.)

What desperately and finally needs to be understood today is that jihad and sharia are normal Islam. These two institutions are universal all over ther Muslim world and are absolutely, theologically mandatory.

All Muslims believe in assertively promoting their hateful and annihilating ideology via the phenomenon of war. All Muslims believe in assertively promoting their hateful and annihilating ideology at home via the phenomenon of tyranny. This is normal Muslim foreign policy and normal Muslim domestic policy.

And it's been going on for 1400 years now. As John Adams and Thomas Jefferson observed over 200 years ago in their report to Congress, Muslims do this evil because:

"�it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners..."

Now, this unspeakable horror isn't radical or extremist Islam. It's Islam.

Our current, soi-dissant "war on terror" is redolent of dishonesty and cowardice. This fraudulently named "war on terror" is redolent of weakness and failure. After five years of feckless and sissified "fighting" on the part of the West, this farcical war is almost nothing but a boondoggle and fiasco.

The West is losing -- any everybody knows it. The mushroom clouds over New York, Washington, Los Angeles, and London are looming -- and everybody knows it.

On September 20th, 2001, intellectually lazy, incurious, and weak George Bush basically lied thru his teeth and said this war was against a "hijacked" version of Islam. 59 months and 10 days later, on August 30th, 2006, President Bush basically lied thru his teeth again and said this war was against a "twisted" version of Islam.

So in five years we have made no progress. In five long years we have learned nothing. The evil philosophy of Islam lives and thrives. It goes unopposed and unattacked by the philosophy of Western liberalism. The rank horror of the ideology of Islam goes unmolested by Westernism.

Calling the War on Islam a "war on terror" is as false and foolish as calling it a "war on mass-murder." The name is meaningless and virtually suicidal. We in the West will never defeat the enemy until we have the honesty and courage to accurately name it!

Saying "fundamentalist" or "militant" Islam is the problem is like saying fundamentalist bolshevism or militant nazism is the problem. Were there ever "good" communists or "true" fascists that we in the West could reason, compromise, and live with?

The fact is average or normal or moderate Islam is an ideology every bit as evil as communism, fascism, and Dark Age Christianity. And it's every bit as impossible to deal with and worthy of destruction. Rational, liberal, civilized men have no choice here. Not if they want to live free and be happy, that is.

But do they? That's an interesting question. Our world seems close to intellectually and morally bankrupt -- and thus not at all up to this fight.

Nevertheless: the reality is all communists, fascists, and witch-burning Spanish Inquisitionalists need to be destroyed -- not just the "radicals" and "extremists." There are no "moderates" we can or should deal with.

So too in the War on Islam. Normal Islam is the enemy. Islam itself is the enemy which needs to be summarily annihilated.

* * * * *

But as the semi-civilized, semi-free (and semi-rational, semi-liberal) people of noble Western Civilization battle the barbaric totalitarian jihadist and shariist Muslims, there are two giant intellectual problems for the confused, corrupt, compromised Western liberals.

First, the religious West -- led by the evil and wantonly illiberal conservatives -- sees the religion and philosophy of Islam as basically no different and no worse than the religion and philosophy of Christianity (or Judaism, Mormonism, Hinduism, and Buddhism). But this is radically wrong and tragically self-destructive.

Second, the multicultural West -- lead by the evil and wantonly illiberal progressives -- sees the culture and life-style of the Muslims as basically no different and no worse than the culture and life-style of the West. But this is radically wrong and tragically self-destructive.

The truth is this thought-system and this group of people is as black as anything that has ever existed in the history of the world. For Westeners to live and thrive, Islam and Muslims need to be extirpated from the family of man.

Now, let's not make any mistakes here. All religions are loathsome, hideously destructive, and deeply in need of extermination. All religions are utterly false and utterly evil. All religions are the enemy of life and happiness, progress and wealth, philosophy and science, reasonism and liberalism.

But not all religions are as stunningly low, ignorant, and depraved as Islam. In fact, none are. Christianity, Judaism, Mormonism, Hinduism, Buddhism, and everything else simply don't compare.

* * * * *

In attempting to fairly judge and accurately evaluate the relative merits of the ideology and philosophy of Islam, it's worth remembering its roots i.e. where and when it came from. Islam was the product of the backward place of savage, desolate Arabia, and the primitive, Dark Age time of the Medieval Period. The ideology and philosophy of the Christians and Jews, in contrast, was the product of the reason-based, scientific, civilized, advanced, and noble West, and the rational, liberal Classical Era. A religion and thought-system of Dark Age, nomadic, desert Arab tribes doesn't compare to the religions and thought-systems largely derived from ascendent, heroic, high culture Greeks and Romans.

Moreover, the still pretty evil god-worship of Europeans was vastly humanized, civilized, and improved by the Reformation and the Enlightenment. This contrasts vividly with the unchanged, unimproved, wholly evil religion of the Arabs. Moses and Jesus were, to be sure, terrible people advocating a terrible belief-system and life-style. But Mohammed (agony and misery be upon him) was on a whole other level. His god needs to be obliterated.

Islam just needs to die. That's it. And, if necessary -- all the activist, supporting Muslims with it.

At the least, a new Islam needs to emerge. A Western liberal Islam -- if that's actually possible. An Islam wherein you can look at the majority of its adherents anywhere in the world and say, in effect: "There goes a (typical) Republican!" or "There goes a (standard) Democrat!"

You can't remotely say that now. Virtually all Muslims today are jihadist and shariist. There's virtually no Muslim anywhere in the world that can honestly say he opposes normal-type Muslim propagation (jihad) and normal-type Muslim law (sharia). There's virtually no Muslim anywhere in the world that can honestly be called a Western liberal. For those who don't believe this -- name one.

What is desperately needed in the post 9/11 WMD era are anti-Muslim Muslims. Something like "lapsed Catholics" or "non-practicing Jews." We need assimilated Muslims who have adopted the ways of Westernism. For every other opposing ideological group on Earth -- including exotic Buddhists, quietly strange Confucians, old-time nazis, and radical communists -- this adoption proves easy. They come to the West, change somewhat, and fit right in.

But not Muslims.

* * * * *

The reality of today is the vast majority of all Muslims -- whether in the West or Islamdom -- consider Osama and Nasrallah folk heroes. The vast majority sympathize with, or actively support, all those multifarious suicide bombings and mass-murder atrocities. For them, today is a day of celebration. And they pray for a nuclear holocaust in the capital of the world, New York City. This last is something the Muslims probably will make happen.

Such is Islam. Such is the stunning and unprecedented moral depravity of Muslims. And all their loves and fervent goals represent the attitudes and beliefs of both today's version of Islam and 1400-year-old traditional Islam. Muslims love death -- ours and theirs. This belief is precisely what needs to be mercilessly and utterly annihilated.

The West needs to declare war on Islam itself. America needs to declare war -- not just on Al Qaeda and the Taliban -- but Hezbollah, Hamas, Fatah, the Muslim Brotherhood, Islamic Jihad, Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade, Al-Gama Al-Islamiya, Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam, and all the others.We need to name names and publically, explicitly, loudly, proudly target them for extinction.

Now, it's true that the West should focus on the informal soldiers and ideological warriors, initially and primarily. Those Muslims with guns and bombs -- and maps and pictures -- should indeed be assaulted first. They really are "terrorists" and "mass-murderers" in their tactics and behavior, and thus more immediately dangerous to the West.

But the main enemy is Islam itself. Standard, typical, average, normal, moderate Muslims provide the terrorists with most of their moral and financial support. And standard, moderate, Muslim governments -- all of which should be immediately, violently overthrown -- provide most of their safe harbors, military training, and political direction. But Islam itself is the enemy.

So death to Islam! Death to this subhuman, wretched, loathsome ideology and belief-system! It's time for the West and everyone good on earth to passionately, morally denounce it, and openly, viscerally revile it.

No more "Why do they hate us?" sissiness, introspection, and self-criticism. Time to ask "Why don't we hate them?" We certainly should.

And if we truly wish to live and thrive we must. Muslims certainly deserve such heart-felt hatred. They're practically, openly begging for it.

So death to Islam! It's time to slaughter all the active jihadists and shariists worldwide. And all those who actively support them.

Let's win the War on (moderate) Islam. No more religious ecumenicalism and multicultural tolerance when it comes to (moderate) Muslims.

Islam is evil. Muslims are monsters. Death to Islam!

(Edited by Andre Zantonavitch on 9/11, 11:59pm)

Post 1

Monday, September 11, 2006 - 4:19pm

http://www.islamicinstitute.org/index2.htm

The key to winning the war on Islam is tell the truth. And the truth is: Islam is evil.

Calling a spade a spade is always valuable.

The point that needs to be made is average Muslims are monsters.

Upon what do you base this?

From the beginning five years ago today, the followers of Mohammed (death be upon him) have been saying one thing consistently worldwide: "This is a war against Islam."

And what about people like King Abdullah of Jordan? He has condemned terrorism many times.

When we fight our absurdly and bastardly named "war on terror" what we're really (lamely) attacking and really (pitifully) opposing is the aggressive warfare of jihad and the fascist tyranny of sharia.

It's quite absurd alright. The main problem is that a war requires a defined, concrete enemy. If your goal is to get bin Laden, that goal can be accomplished. If your goal is to abstract, how can you know if it is achieved?

Here's another example. I want to lose weight--that's not a goal. I want to lose ten pounds in six months--that's a goal.

What desperately and finally needs to be understood today is that jihad and sharia are normal Islam. These two institutions are universal all over ther Muslim world and are absolutely, theologically mandatory.

There must be a lot of infidels. A lot of them don't take this stuff seriously.

All Muslims believe in assertively promoting their hateful and annihilating ideoolgy via the phenomenon of war.

I am impressed. If you personally know every one of them, you must have a great deal of time and a really busy social secretary.

All Muslims believe in assertively promoting their hateful and annihilating ideology at home via the phenomenon of tyranny. This is normal Muslim foreign policy and normal Muslim domestic policy.

There's that three-letter word all again.

"�it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners..."

I never expected you to quote these guys. I'm impressed. Fortunately, Jefferson and Adams also realized that war is something that should be discussed and considered. Jefferson did not jump into a war recklessly.

And the attacks by the Barbary Pirates were truly unprovoked ones. This was a time when America did not have troops all over the world. When the treaties were signed, the navy came home. And since this was a naval war, they fought directly against the perpetrators (not the people on land).

Our current, soi-dissant "war on terror" is redolent of dishonesty and cowardice.

That's true. What is President Bush's military record? Oh, that's right. He doesn't have one.

this farcical war is almost nothing but a boondoggle and fiasco.

Everything else the federal government has done has been a boondoggle and fiasco. Just look at the war on drugs and the war on povery. What made you think the war on terror would be any different?

The West is losing -- any everybody knows it. The mushroom clouds over New York, Washington, Los Angeles, and London are looming -- and everybody knows it.

How many electric generators did you purchase back in December of 1999?

intellectually lazy, incurious, and weak George Bush basically lied thru his teeth

He's lied before and probably will again. That's a good description of him.

So in five years we have made no progress. In five long years we have learned nothing.

Who is we?

The evil philosophy of Islam lives and thrives.

"The spread of evil is the symptom of a vacuum." What are you doing to fill the vacuum?

We in the West will never defeat the enemy until we have the honesty and courage to accurately name it!

Can you kill an idea by killing people?

Rational, liberal, civilized men have no chance here.

Where is here? If such men "have no chance here," what are they supposed to do?

Our world seems close to intellectually and morally bankrupt -- and thus not at all up to this fight.

I'm up to the fight, but I don't think my fight is the same as yours.

Nevertheless: the reality is all communists, fascists, and witch-burning Spanish Inquisitionalists need to be destroyed -- not just the "radicals" and "extremists."

What are you doing about it?

There are no "moderates" we can or should deal with.

Have you tried?

First, the religious West -- led by the evil and wantonly illiberal conservatives -- sees the religion and philosophy of Islam as basically no different and no worse than the religion and philosophy of Christianity (or Judaism, Mormonism, Hinduism, and Buddhism). But this is radically wrong and tragically self-destructive.

All religions are self-destructive. Of course, religious people can't find religion.

Islam was the product of the backward place of savage, desolate Arabia, and the primitive, Dark Age time of the Medieval Period.

How is it that these people created algebra and Arabic numerals? How is it that some of Euclid's classics are only available in Arabic today?

A religion and thought-system of Dark Age, nomadic, desert Arab tribes doesn't compare to the religions and thought-systems largely derived from ascendent, heroic, high culture Greeks and Romans.

These "high-culture" people killed Socrates, had slavery, and watched gladiators.

Moreover, the still pretty evil god-worship of Europeans was vastly humanized, civilized, and improved by the Reformation and the Enlightenment.

Luther rejected Aristotle and brought Augustine to the forefront of Protestantism. He was also basically the first Nazi in history.

At the least, a new Islam needs to emerge. A Western liberal Islam -- if that's actually possible.

Some of them are trying to do that. How does threatening genocide help this cause?

There's virtually no Muslim anywhere in the world that can honestly be called a Western liberal. For those who don't believe this -- name one.

Queen Noor.

Also, go here:

The reality of today is the vast majority of all Muslims -- whether in the West or Islamdom -- consider Osama and Nasrallah folk heroes. The vast majority sympathize with, or actively support, all those multifarious suicide bombings and mass-murder atrocities. For them, today is a day of celebration. And they pray for a nuclear holocaust in the capital of the world, New York City.

Are you a mindreader?

The West needs to declare war on Islam itself. America needs to declare war -- not just on Al Qaeda and the Taliban -- but Hezbollah, Hamas, Fatah, the Muslim Brotherhood, Islamic Jihad, Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade, Al-Gama Al-Islamiya, Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam, and all the others.

I know what Bush claims that al-Qaeda did. What did these other groups do to the USA?

No more "Why do they hate us?" sissiness, introspection, and self-criticism. Time to ask "Why don't we hate them?" We certainly should.

I find hatred to be non-productive. I don't hate people until they do something to me first. Are you implying that people should not consider their actions?

Post 2

Tuesday, September 12, 2006 - 7:26am

Although he was possibly the worst novelist of the 20th Century, this is a good quote:

You can wipe out your opponents. But if you do it unjustly you become eligible for being wiped out yourself. --Ernest Hemingway

Post 3

Tuesday, September 12, 2006 - 3:34pm

By the way, here's Atlas Shrugged in Turkish:

http://www.pandora.com.tr/urun.asp?id=96365

Post 4

Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 4:12am

Chris: At some point all these exceptionally verbose comments constitute a kind of filibuster. They're more like talking at someone than to them. Or they're like shouting. This can all be rather rude. And it considerably degrades the discussion.

You certainly seem intelligent and educated enough, but I wish you would confine yourself to your three or four best and most important comments on any given article -- not just dump an avalanche of random jibes on someone's head. Rather than a near-infinite number of quick, shallow, thoughtless quips on various subjects, maybe you should focus more on quality than quantity.

Post 5

Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 2:06pm

Here's the new system.

Post 6

Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 8:51pm

"Why don't we hate them?"

Andre,

I am in complete agreement with almost all you say. I would differ by describing Bush's description of "Islam hijacked" as pragmatic political appeasement and wishful thinking, not as lying thru his teeth. I would rather criticize the people who practice evil (muslims) than the evil they practice (islam). The religion itself is mere words in a book, it is the people who are evil. (Of course, I do understand you, this is a matter of emphasis only.) You say that we need muslims to reform. Again, I would change the emphasis, (as the lapsed Catholic child of a lapsed Jew) and say that muslims need to reform, if they dont want us to kill them. I am sorry that I haven't responded to this excellent post before.

Ted

Post 7

Thursday, September 14, 2006 - 7:21am

Chris: At some point all these exceptionally verbose comments constitute a kind of filibuster. They're more like talking at someone than to them.

I have a lot of time. When I have less time, my activities here will likely be curtailed greatly.

You do raise some valid points. How many people have you encountered, for example, who won't read Atlas Shrugged simply because of its length? People have definitely told me that.

I have told many people in forums: "If you want your posts to be read, make them readable."

I have actually become more disciplined in my comments since I first strated here. But there's always room for improvement.

Post 8

Thursday, September 14, 2006 - 3:06pm

Ted writes:

I would differ by describing Bush's description of "Islam hijacked" as pragmatic political appeasement and wishful thinking, not as lying thru his teeth. I would rather criticize the people who practice evil (muslims) than the evil they practice (islam). The religion itself is mere words in a book, it is the people who are evil. (Of course, I do understand you, this is a matter of emphasis only.) You say that we need muslims to reform. Again, I would change the emphasis, (as the lapsed Catholic child of a lapsed Jew) and say that muslims need to reform, if they dont want us to kill them.

This is all perfectly reasonable. Sometimes I don't write exactly what I think because I'm going for rhetorical effect. I always have a little bit of fun with this.

But unlike practically everybody else in America and Objectivism, I've been aware of Muslims for a long time now. Andrew Bostom said his life was changed by 9/11, while for Ibn Warraq it was the 1989 fatwah calling for the murder of Salmon Rushdie. But I was very surprised by the 1979 Khomeini revolution in Iran and having been paying a certain grave amount of attention ever since. Very quietly, these guys have always seemed like a real menace. Post 9/11, they aren't even quiet any more.

Living in New York I see many Muslims every day. And I'm on a pretty friendly basis with quite a few. New York Muslims do have the personal virtue of not being especially prone to criminality or welfare. But socially they keep their women locked up pretty tight, and it's very hard indeed to get them to talk to you about 9/11, Osama, and Nasrallah. And when you do it's bad. These political and socio-economic views are almost always expressed extremely quietly and reluctantly -- whether in private conversation or in the media -- but such philosophical views are also backed up by many public surveys. On the whole, these social views are dreadful enough that I think they justify the seemingly outrageous claim "Muslims are monsters."

(Edited by Andre Zantonavitch on 9/14, 3:11pm)

Post 9

Thursday, September 14, 2006 - 9:43pm

� EL ATLAL

I have always found the Arabic language intriguing, and before 9/11, I went to the Arabic neighborhood of Brooklyn to buy the CD's of the classical Arabic singer Umm Kulthum. I found the strange stares and almost - no, actually - guilty looks of the Arab shop-owners bizarre. Did they think I was there to do something other than to buy the music they were selling?

I had also made friends with a Yemeni shop owner in my own neighborhood where I regularly bought my favorite periodicals. By September 13th, (if not before) he was flying a small American flag behind the counter, and he had a small framed picture of the Twin Towers next to it. It would be a week before mass-market glossies of the attacks were available. I did not see the owner, his son was at the counter. I bought my paper silently and left. (In that neighborhood, all the news stand were owned by Muslims: Pakistanis or Arabs.) Within three months his shop was closed, and he was gone.

Umm Kulthum's singing is an acquired taste. Only her El Atlal, "the Ruins" and her Inta Omri, "Thou my Soul," are palatable to the Western ear. I did not destroy her disks after the attacks, but neither did I play them. The moment the news broke on TV that hostilities our defense had begun in Iraq and that we were attempting a surgical removal of Saddam, I played El Atlal, cranked up to eleven. Just so that my neighbors would not misunderstand, I then blasted Outkast's Bombs over Baghdad, over and over and over. My neighbor upstairs refrained from playing his Salsa in retaliation.

� Ted Keer, Sep 15, 2006, NYC

(Edited by Ted Keer
on 9/14, 9:47pm)

Post 10

Friday, September 15, 2006 - 12:04am

EL ATLAL

• I have always found the Arabic language intriguing, and before 9/11 I went to the Arabic neghbourhood of Brooklyn to buy the CD's of the classical Arabic singer Umm Kulthum. I found the strange stares and almost - no, actually guilty - looks of the shops owners bizzare. Did they think I was there to do something other than to buy the music they were sellling?

• I made friends with a Yemeni shop ownere in my own neighbourhood where I regularly bought my favourite periodicals. On September 12th, he was flying a small American flag behind where he stood at the counter, and he had a small framed picture of the Twin Towers next to it. It would be a week before mass-market glossies of the attacks would be available. I did not see the owner, jhis son was at the counter. I bought the paper silently and left. (In that neighbourhood, all the news stand were owned by Muslims, Pakistanis or Arabs.) Within three months his shop was closed and he was gone.

• Umm Kulthum's singing is an acquired taste. Only her El Atlal, "the Ruins" and her Inta Omri, "Thou my Soul," are palatable to the Western ear. I did not destroy her disks after the attacks, but neither did I play them. The moment the news broke on TV that hostilities our defense had begun in Iraq and that we were attempting a surgical removal of Saddam, I played "El Atlal," cranked up to eleven. Just so that my neighbours would not misubderstand, I then blasted Outkast's "Bombs over Baghdad," over and over and over. My neighbour upstairs refrained from playing his Salsa in retalliation.

• Ted Keer, Sep 15, 2006, NYC

Post 11

Friday, September 15, 2006 - 8:27am

But unlike practically everybody else in America and Objectivism, I've been aware of Muslims for a long time now.

I went through a very anti-Islam period, back in 1986-7 when I was a teenager. I got the impression that "they don't leave people alone."

Andrew Bostom said his life was changed by 9/11, while for Ibn Warraq it was the 1989 fatwah calling for the murder of Salmon Rushdie.

I have heard of Warraq, but have not heard of Bostom.

Has it occurred to some of you that perhaps Islam has been discredited in the eyes of many who have already been born into religion? You certainly seem to hear more and more from apostates now than you did ten years ago. I don't think they are going away.

I know this happened for me with Catholicism. Certainly the corruption of the church had an influence in convincing me to leave it. I remember thinking: "A lot of people say that they believe in god, but they certainly don't act like it."

I think another reason why the goons are making noise is desperation. They see things like the Internet, satellite television, and cell phones. They know that it is just going to get harder and harder to keep people ignorant. The terrorists want to keep people ignorant. However, I think that most humans have a natural desire for knowledge.

For that same reason, we Americans discredit and dishonor the legacy of Jefferson by dropping bombs and sending soldiers everywhere.

But socially they keep their women locked up pretty tight, and it's very hard indeed to get them to talk to you about 9/11, Osama, and Nasrallah.

It always amazes me when I hear any woman say anything positive about Islam. Lisa Halaby was a pretty successful architect-planner and converted to it. She was working on Amman Airport when she met King Hussein. She is now known as Queen Noor.

Then again, in China, it was often the mothers who would tie up their daughters' feet. That idiotic practice has been discredited. It will happen with Islam, too.

I have often said that if you want to see how civilized a society is, just look at how men treat the women.

Unfortunately, I think women in this country have conceded a great deal. It is definitely reflected in the increase in stuff like plastic surgery. I have said many times: "If women had self-respect, the makeup industry would be out of business."

Post 12

Friday, September 15, 2006 - 7:19pm

The German Nazis were well-known for keeping their lawns neat, gently playing with their kids and dogs, and listening patiently to and not beating their wives. But their ideology still made them monsters. Muslims in the West don't even function under political compulsion -- but they maintain their hard-line fascist ideology.

Post 13

Saturday, September 16, 2006 - 12:11am

To paraphrase a martyr:

"My paramount object in this struggle is to save the West, and is not either to save or to destroy islam. If I could save the West without killing any muslim I would do it, and if I could save it by killing all the muslims I would do it; and if I could save it by killing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about muslimry, and the religious zealots, I do because I believe it helps to save the West; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the West. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause."

Ted Keer, Sep 15, 2006, Manhattan

(This was originally posted on the Bombing thread.)

Post 14

Saturday, September 16, 2006 - 5:35pm

ORIANA FALLACI
requiescat in pace
Freedom Fighter
Humanist
Firebrand

The provocative Italian expatriate, lately of fame for the crie du coeur, her post-9/11 tract The Rage and the Pride, has died. Fallaci was born to a family of Italian resisters, passing the Second World War in her young teens. She became world famous in the '60s as a journalist, having interviewed Indira Gandhi of India and Ali Bhutto of Pakistan, the Shah of Iran and Henry Kissinger, Norman Mailer and Golda Meir.

She spoke [in her Interview with History] of Yasir Arafat: "The only striking thing about him was his moustache and the automatic rifle that he wore on his shoulder with the free-and-easy air of one who is never separated from it... He was short his hands were small, even his feet. Too small, you thought, to sustain his fat legs and his massive trunk with its huge hips and swollen, obese stomach...a small head the face of an actor...almost no cheeks or forehead. Everything is summed up in a large mouth with red and fleshy lips... You would have concluded that the man was important only because he was accompanied by a bodyguard. But what a bodyguard! The most gorgeous piece of male flesh I had ever seen. Tall, slender, elegant, the type who wears camouflage and coveralls as though they were black tie and tails, with the chiseled features of a Western lady-killer... Arafat brought him along with such tender pride I had the...thought that he was more than a bodyguard..."

In The Rage and the Pride, Fallaci, an atheist and humanist, and a striking beauty who was forced into a "temporary" muslim marriage to an Iranian functionary in order to avoid being stoned to death for having been alone in a room with him, skewers islam and the muslim locusts destroying the homeland from which she was self-exiled. She described her rage at watching muslim beasts pissing on the Florence Cathedral, and her Pride for her chosen homeland, America, which she defended more rabidly than any but another. Like the British immigrant, journalist and genius Christopher Hitchens, she could see the virtues of her adopted homeland much more clearly, and defend it with ever so much more passion than any domestic American pundit I can recall.

In Europe, she was prosecuted for, and found guilty of defaming islam. What a crime of which to be guilty! A Manhattan resident herself, I had always wished to know a way to send her flowers or a gift, a she lay dying form cancer and under death threats from the religionists of peace. Her stay in purgatory will be so much shorter for the injustice suffered here on earth. I said three Hail Mary's for her when I read the news. [Objectivists need a ceremonial guys!] I only hope that she knew of Pope Benedict's recent remarks on that devil incarnate, Muhammad, the Prophet of Death. I am glad that she will not have to bear the indignity of hearing the Church retract the truth.

Ted Keer, Sep 16, 2006, Manhattan

The multiple edits are either inserts in brackets, or corrections of format errors due to cutting and pasting.

(Edited by Ted Keer
on 9/16, 5:43pm)

(Edited by Ted Keer
on 9/16, 7:05pm)

(Edited by Ted Keer
on 9/16, 7:10pm)

(Edited by Ted Keer
on 9/17, 12:17am)

Post 15

Monday, September 18, 2006 - 10:26am

This should be in the news.

Post 16

Friday, September 22, 2006 - 4:03pm

Iran & Unconditional Surrender

I don't see how we can hope to follow the same path with Iran or any other muslim state that we did with Japan or Germany [in WWII] for the following reason; the throat-slitters, their profit, their text and their traditional teachings all demand the violent establishment of theocracy as a central (if not the essential) trait of their creed. Shintoists worshipped not death per se, but ancestors. Their emperor was left in place even given our knowledge of his guilt in the planning and execution of the war. His "above-it-all-ness" was a postwar fiction that served a purpose.

Likewise, in Germany, Nazism as a pagan Fuehrer/Volk cult was being grafted onto a resentful once-proud nation that had long accepted altruistic, authoritarian, and statist principles, but which accepted Nazism only so long as it brought psychological and economic relief from the humiliation of WWI, Versailles & Weimar Germany. Once the Allies had militarily humiliated the Reich and had established the Marshall plan there was little desire by the populace to stay with Nazism or to identify with it psychologically. The Nazi insurgency fizzled out rather quickly. Adam Reed's suggested and otherwise reasonable policy would work fine with Cuba, Venezuela or North Korea, because those cultures are not cultures with a centuries long history of sharia and jihad.

The "religion" of the throat-slitters is not just one of ancestor worship, or one only superficially grafted onto a suitable populace. The mere advocacy of separation of religion and state in Iran is laudable in its goals but woefully inadequate as a plan for execution. Could the religion even be allowed to survive without its remaining an eternal threat to the state? Christianity can be freely practiced under a secular state because Jesus preached separation of church and state and none of his words support or require coercion:

"Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's..." "Cast not the first stone..." "Turn the other cheek..."
"Love thine enemy..." "The kingdom of the Lord is within you..."

These are not the statements of a theocrat or would be dictator. Christianity as espoused by the words of its prophet (if not the actions of its followers) eschews political power while the creed of the throat-slitters demands it. There is no way to practice that creed freely, since its tenets demand the initiation of force against innocents. A mere separation of religion and state is not possible, the religion must reform itself if it can and will or its adherents will eventually earn the martyrdom that its obese imams preach to their food and reason deprived flocks.

A reformation might even begin in Iran, a state with some history of moderate freedom under a secular government. This seems most likely to me to happen if Iran is put under strict embargo and all its state and military edifice are razed. Kept under strictest quarantine until the contagion becomes less virulent or destroys its host and hence itself, the reformers might have a chance to redirect the spiritual yearnings of this ancient culture. We should only help them in so far as it serves our selfish purposes, but neither extermination (which seems premature and which will begin a holocaust that we should be, but are not yet militarily or emotionally prepared to fight) nor inaction can be our best course of action now.

I fear that nothing other than a mushroom cloud over a major city will bring America to its senses. In the mean time I will not pretend that my words here address the problem in any other way than getting my fears off my chest. I can do this without either calling other posters to this list p*ssies or would-be genocides. Resorting to attacking a third party when one is thwarted by an insuperable obstacle is called displacement activity, a behavior found both among stressed out animals and un-self-critical so-called egoists. I, for one, want to wake up from this collective nightmare, not swat at phantoms while I die in my sleep.

Ted Keer, Sep 22, 2006, NYC

[This post was originally submitted to SOLO where Adam Reed had advocated treating Iran like Germany in WWII, with total surrender followed by rapid de-Nazification. The oblique referal to those engaging in displacement activity is in response to those on the list who were attacking other listers with a misplaced vehemence. Phil Coates words on this post were reported there like some sort of shameful gossip. I might have saved myself the effort of making this editorial comment by posting here first.]

Post 17

Friday, September 22, 2006 - 6:12pm

I still stick with my original thesis as expressed in Post 0: The key to winning the War on Islam (or the War on Current and/or Historical Islam) is tell the truth. Point out that this ideology is hateful and rotten, like naziism and communism. Express in public profound and passionate moral condemnation and personal visceral revulsion. Do this openly and proudly. Don't merely privately shudder in fear, grind your teeth, narrow your lips and eyes -- and have wild fantasies of mindless genocide as you check out the various KKK-style sites on the web. Would-be socially moral people also need to be at least a little courageous here, even tho' admittedly Islam (i.e. regular and moderate Islam) is such an evil ideology that Muslims routinely torture and slaughter their free speech-practicing critics.

But there's at least one additional point which I failed to point out or at least properly emphasize. The locus of Muslim evil is about 99% the state. Smash all those dreadful tyrannies -- such as our "allies" Pakistan and Saudi Arabia -- and the great likelihood is 99% of the problems and global terror will cease.

I heard an outstanding lecture a few nights ago by ARI's John Lewis and he pointed out that when America defeated Japan in WWII the US made a point to obliterate their militaristic Shinto/Bushido fascist ideology as backed by the state -- but the US allowed it to continue unmolested in private. This meant: respect for freedom of philosophy (and religion) but no Japanese government teaching of militarism in government schools, nor in radio and t'v' broadcasts, nor in the print media, nor any government funding for temples and shrines. America crushed and repressed the state-recognized version of this evil ideology ruthlessly and without a second thought.

Now, this should have happened in Afghanistan and Iraq! We need a complete separation of mosque and state -- which, historically, has never happened. The result might have been simply outstanding -- the intense evil of moderate Islam notwithstanding.

(One interesting sidenote: Perhaps because Professor Lewis was a historian or classicist or teaches in Ohio at a great remove from ARI in California, he did not seem to have a problem with my usual polite but take-no-prisoners style and type of questions. He handled about four tough questions and follow-ups with aplomb, and with no evident cultism or religiosity. This is such a contrast with Yaron Brook, Gary Hull, etc., which I can't help but find somewhat personally malicious, bizarre, and weak.)

(Edited by Andre Zantonavitch on 9/22, 6:25pm)

Post 18

Friday, September 22, 2006 - 8:55pm

But Is It Even a Religion?

While Nazism co-opted Christianity where it could, and either revived or flat out invented pagan mythology in order to embody its beliefs, and Bushido used the Shinto religion as its substratum, at least Christianity, Norse mythology and Shinto were separable from the state. The so-called religion of the throat-cutters is undeniably a political philosophy, that is, it is an ideology which impels its followers to take action to control the state - jihad - and requires them to institute a particularly vicious code of law - sharia.

The text of the Butcher's book does not make establishing sharia voluntary or something that throat-slitters only did in olden times. Unlike Judaism and Christianity, which have alternative texts and prophets to refer to, and an established history of self-criticism, the Butcher's followers acknowledge only one prophet - a prophet whose acts would be considered the acts of a bandit and a tyrant, if only he had not had his pronouncements promulgated as words dictated by an angel. This so-called religion resembles Nazism following Mein Kampf or Communists reading Lenin or Mao, except that it has the trump of 72 ghostly heifers.

Will every existent copy of the Butcher's book be burnt and redacted editions be put forth?

How do you practice throat-cutting in private?

Ted Keer, 22 Sep 2006, NYC

Post 19

Saturday, September 23, 2006 - 8:35pm