Thursday, June 02, 2016

Is ISIS the be-all and end-all of the Islamic threat?

Recent headlines and commentary warn us about ISIS.  They report that ISIS did this and ISIS did that and we have to confront ISIS as if it is the only aspect of Islam that is a threat that we need to be concerned about. 

Over the last decade our concerns were focused on al Qaeda, Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood, Taliban, Hezbollah, Boko Haram and Al-shabaab.  What do all of these terrorist organizations have in common?  Wikipedia has a page listing well over 150 terrorist groups designated by the nations of the world HERE.  The great majority are led and populated by Muslims based on their Islamic faith.  Yet recently only ISIS is reported as “the problem.”

This myopic view of the Islamic threat was highlighted by a recent article I read that focused only on ISIS as our current threat.  I wrote to the author to challenge that view as follows:

“…we are too focused on ISIS at the expense of ignoring Islam.   ISIS is all about Islamic doctrine, faithfully.  Islamic doctrine has spawned hundreds of other "ISISs" under different names.  Islamic doctrine has spawned millions of other one-man ISISs to do similar work.  The day that government officials, the media and others identify Islamic doctrine as the engine behind terror and subversion will be the FIRST day we really begin to identify the enemy we face.”

The reply to my comment was essentially this:

“Islam, as one of the world's leading religions/cultures, will never be attacked directly by any free world government…[because] among its adherents are millions of good, peaceful people the world over who don't favor radical Islamist doctrine, but are too afraid to stand up to terrorism... not even to the extent that you and I do in our newsletters. To have these peaceful Muslims turn against us is not a good idea. We shouldn't add hundreds of millions more Muslims to the ranks of the tens of millions of Islamist radicals who hate us now.

The italicized, underlined text is our biggest problem.  We misunderstand the believers of Islam, including Islamic history and doctrine.  We mistakenly believe that the “millions of good, peaceful [Muslim] people the world over” don’t favor “radical Islamic doctrine.”  Newsflash:  The doctrine of ISIS is the doctrine of Islam.  Much of the West has not accepted and acknowledged this fact.  Consequently we have this misinformed fear that we will turn “good, peaceful Muslims” against us.”  We fail to admit that the chosen belief system of those good, peaceful Muslims, Islam, is endowed with built in hatred of the West, our culture, our form of governance and our faith.  The doctrine of Islam, as believed, taught, and practiced by most of today’s Islamic leaders would like nothing less than the annihilation of the US, Israel and the West, generally.

"Radical" Islamic doctrine is Islamic doctrine.  That is the problem that he and others are disillusioned by:  It is not "radical" Islamic doctrine.  It is simply "Islamic doctrine."  It is a big mistake to divide Islam into two parts:  Radical and non-radical.  They cannot be separated.

Believers in the Islamic ideology/religion/belief system almost universally believe in Sharia, the caliphate, and some form of jihad/supremacism/intolerance of other beliefs.   The "radicals" are the front line terrorists and their direct support system.  A huge number of other "moderate" Muslims support the radicals in numerous ways:  Financially, politically, logistically, socially and spiritually.  Check out recent surveys.  But also bear in mind that a core tenant of Islam is taqiyya.  Consequently surveys will not reveal true beliefs.   And remember that many Muslims that had been reported by our naïve media as "moderates" turned out to be some of the greatest promoters of ISIS, al Qaeda, Muslim Brotherhood, etc.

He did acknowledge that… 

“The big problem with Islam today is that the free world is doing almost nothing to stop groups like ISIS, and not just ISIS, but all Islamic terrorist organizations.

“ISIS spreads because no one capable of obliterating them has engaged them with the overwhelming force necessary to do the job. ISIS grows because its record of horrific accomplishments attracts the sickos of the world, who will cease to be drawn to ISIS only when it and its leadership are finally annihilated...ditto for all the other Islamist terrorist organizations.

“Few American understand that the defeat of Islamic terrorism and the Islamic Caliphate will soon require an effort not unlike the one undertaken to win World War II.”

This is all true.  I added the following to his comments:

Islam is a seditious ideology, just as Fascism was during WWII.  Were there "moderate" and "radical" Fascists during WWII.  I guess, sure.  The "radical" Fascists were the leaders, the politicians, the planners, the protectors, most of the military. The "moderate" Fascists were many of the rest who believed in the Fascist vision and supported the "radical Fascists" in any way they could.  Not all Germans were Fascist just like not all Middle Easterners are Muslim.  But all Fascists were Fascist and a danger to our existence at the time.  All Muslims are Muslims because they believe in the Islamic doctrine and have demonstrated general agreement with Islamic goals and methods:  Sharia, some form of jihad, supremacism, the Caliphate, etc.

He asked me, “what do we do about it?”  I replied,

The first thing we "do about it" is acknowledge the existence of the seditious belief system, Islam, just as we acknowledged the seditious belief system, Fascism.  But if we/you refuse to acknowledge the reality of the belief system, there is nothing effective that we WILL do.  Required action will not make sense and will be off limits.  If we DO acknowledge the reality of the belief system, the rest will take care of itself.  Taking effective action (whether it be cutting Muslim immigration, some deportations, monitoring mosques, whatever) will continue to be "off limits" as long as we continue to deny the reality of the Islamic doctrine, history and promises of today's majority Muslim leaders to ultimately force our submission to Islam.  Refusing to acknowledge the reality of what we are up against will not magically make the threat any less.  Know the life of Muhammad and you will know what Islam has in store.

I added,

A few years ago I pointedly asked Zudhi Jasser if he is willing to disregard the 60% of the Islamic Trilogy (Qur'an, Hadith, Sira) that calls for jihad, conversion, submission or elimination of the infidel, an Islamic Caliphate, Jew hatred, Sharia (which mandate treatment of women and homosexuals in ways we consider a crime).  He did not respond.  If he is such a motivated defender of "moderate" Islam, he could have at least made an attempt to explain.  If we disregarded 60% of the Bible, we would not be Christians. 

But unlike Christianity, Islam mandates that nothing in their doctrine that Muhammad took literally and that most Muslims have practiced for 1,400 years can be "spiritualized" as we have done in Christianity.  Islam celebrates terror and conquest because Muhammad practiced terror and conquest.  Muslims who preach otherwise are either the exception, or doing it to protect themselves or Islam.  Christianity celebrates peace and forgiveness.  Christians who preach otherwise are the exception or doing it for defensive purposes.  That is the essence of the differences.

Most experts do not believe Islam is reformable, as we understand reform, given its history, established doctrine and momentum.  We understand "reform" as getting us back to our roots, the way we believed it was intended in the beginning.  Yes Islam is being "reformed" from what it was in the prior century, from a relatively benign feeling religion in the background, back to what it has been during most of its history and especially during its early growth and conquests under Muhammad and his offshoots.  It has been reformed back to its violent, supremacist roots.  Today's Islamic leaders are urging reform back to Islam's roots, the way Muhammad intended.  Muhammad was no Jesus.

Either way we are in for some tough times.  Like any looming and growing problem, first we have to identify it honestly.  Then we have to decide whether to take painful actions sooner, or suffer even greater pain later.

The writer then posited a supposition and a few rather provocative, extreme assumptions about possible actions given the realities of Islam as follows:

Here is his supposition: 

“Even if the entire nation came to understand the horrific threat embodied in Islamic doctrine what would such an understanding cause us to do about it? 

Here are his extreme assumptions of necessary actions that keep him and others from accepting reality:

    • Would we demonize Zudhi Jasser and his followers and throw them in jail as imminent threats to the America people? 
    • Would we attempt to deport every Muslim from America?
    • Would we speak out against, and sever all relations with Muslim nations around the world simply because they believe in, and support, Islamic doctrine? 
    • Would we wage war on those whose religion and culture are anti-American, and because the founder of that religion wanted to eliminate all infidels? Should we attempt to punish every Muslim for the murderous thoughts and actions of a few, even a lot of, crazies?”

He concludes,

“In light of this, how in heaven's name could the U.S. ever reach the conviction that Islam itself, the religion and the culture, should be denounced as the nation's number one enemy?” 

In other words, he apparently believes Islam is too big, too widespread to admit that Islamic doctrine is threatening and evil, even if in truth it really does pose an existential threat to the West.  Therefore we shouldn’t even consider Islam as an enemy.

Here is my reply to his supposition and related provocative assumptions…

"Would we demonize Zudhi Jasser and his followers and throw them in jail as imminent threats to the America people?"

No.  There is no reason to jump to the worst possible measures in the case of Muslims who appear to be supporting Western values like Jasser does.  In cases like his we simply need to recognize that he is "wishing" what Islam could be.  We need to recognize that he does not speak of what Islam is.  We just need to know that his "wish" does not reflect Islam, either its orthodox doctrine or the manner most Islamic leaders today interpret and implement Islamic doctrine.   Right now we fawn over the Jassers of the the world believing they speak for the real Islam.  Wrong!  This is one of those steps that would be a no brainer once we correctly acknowledged the motives and methods of Islamic doctrine and history.  But until then, we will continue to self-deceive.

"Would we attempt to deport every Muslim from America?"

Again, suggesting only the most extreme action (intended to suggest how mean spirited we are?) is the only action is not helpful. How about developing a more deliberative and effective vetting process to only admit those who disavow sharia, jihad, the Caliphate in its literal sense, and other aspects of Islam that would warn of seditious activity?  How about a temporary ban of anyone from predominantly Islamic countries, or those who have recently traveled from those countries, with exceptions, until an effective vetting system is developed?  How about deporting Muslims who don't have valid US citizenship and whose actions (public writings, associations, postings, etc.) indicate a seditious belief and intent?  Again, none of these steps seem "American" unless we correctly acknowledged the motives and methods of Islamic doctrine and history.  Once acknowledged, these steps, and more, would seem perfectly reasonable.

Would we speak out against, and sever all relations with Muslim nations around the world simply because they believe in, and support, Islamic doctrine?

To the extent that their leadership has proclaimed hatred and doom to the West or our allies (tantamount to a declaration of war), absolutely.  I would think that Iran and territories controlled by ISIS, al Qaeda, and others who have made similar declarations, would be candidates.  We should reconsider our support of Turkey due to the Erdogan government's current policies.  Libya is another candidate along with a few other African nations.  Saudi Arabia is a big question mark, if you are familiar with the likely content of the redacted "28 pages" of the 9-11 Commission report as well as Saudi Arabia's massive contributions to Middle Eastern Studies Departments of dozens of American universities that are nothing more than Islamic propaganda and recruitment centers.

Would we wage war on those whose religion and culture are anti-American, and because the founder of that religion wanted to eliminate all infidels?

Again, an exaggerated extreme.  But we would be right to oppose their propaganda and effectively counter it in numerous ways.  Right now we are embracing or excusing these rants in the spirit of tolerance, multiculturalism, and our refusal to acknowledge the truth of Islamic doctrine.  We've lost the will to believe and announce that we have a superior culture, form of governance and moral code.  We consider all ideologies universally equal.  We tell each other there is no such thing as evil anymore.  We need to get over that mistake.

Should we attempt to punish every Muslim for the murderous thoughts and actions of a few, even a lot of, crazies?  This is another exaggerated extreme.  But not far off.  We mistakenly assume that just because a declared Muslim isn’t currently in the act of a mass shooting, beheading, or detonation that he is benign.  The fact that he believes at least most of what Islam teaches should be a red flag.  We would be right to monitor mosques in the same manner we monitored Nazi meeting places and cells during WWII.   We would be right to put down demonstrations promoting Islamic doctrine as we would do regarding any other seditious demonstration and ideology.  Again, these will seem unreasonable, un-American, and mean-spirited actions UNLESS we truthfully acknowledge the reality of Islamic doctrine, history and intent.

Yes, we are divided in our desire to commit troops to the battles in the Middle East to destroy the worst elements of a vile ideology that promises destruction of our way of life.  And the reason we are divided is because our government, much of academia, and most of the media fail to acknowledge the reality of Islamic doctrine.  As Allen West accurately observed, we are fighting a "tactic", terrorism.  We need to be fighting an ideology, Islam, in its full orthodox, Muhammadan bloom.  Until we acknowledge that orthodox (call it "fundamentalist" if you wish) Islam is what principally motivates Muslims to engage in their anti-Western fervor, we will fail. 

We fight "the radicals" in the Middle East as if they are the only ones who believe what they believe that motivates them to do what they do.  Wrong!  The majority Muslim populations believe most of the same things "the radicals" believe, especially the Islamic vision, as well as most of the tactics.  THIS is a helpful article that was recently brought to my attention titled "Mohammed, Islamic History, and the Bloody Future of the West."

I am one example of those who feel we have no business militarily in the Middle East at the present time.  I say "at the present time" because until we acknowledge the political components of Islamic doctrine and the widespread belief and support of those doctrines by those populations, we will continue to fail with the type of military action we have engaged in.  And again I say, once we accurately acknowledge Islamic doctrine and its widespread belief, we will unshackle our military in ways that will bring victory instead of being mired in a perpetual and losing battle as we have done now for over a decade.  I commend the website Political Islam to you which reveals the overarching political component of Islamic texts and doctrine.

I commended the following web site for a variety of “solutions” to our current ineffective policies: Islamic Threat Simplified website that focuses on actions we could or should take - gathered from a variety of sources, HERE.

Finally, in answer to his last question,

“In light of this, how in heaven's name could the U.S. ever reach the conviction that Islam itself, the religion and the culture, should be denounced as the nation's number one enemy?”

Because if we don’t, we are screwed.  Denying reality will not save us. 

3 comments:

Brother Michael said...

Excellent in-depth assessment.

It is frustrating to think that few Americans will get this information, let alone understand it. Fewer still are those who are in a position to act on it. Our country will probably be inundated with troubling--if not violent--social conflict before the roots of the problem are understood--if ever.

Anonymous said...

You Can’t Understand ISIS If You Don’t Know the History of Wahhabism in Saudi Arabia
* http://themillenniumreport.com/2014/08/you-cant-understand-isis-if-you-dont-know-the-history-of-wahhabism-in-saudi-arabia/
* http://themillenniumreport.com/2015/12/you-cant-understand-isis-if-you-dont-know-the-history-of-wahhabism-in-saudi-arabia-2/

...just FYI.

Gerardo Moochie said...

And you can't understand Islam or ISIS without understanding the life of Muhammad. The entire body of Islamic doctrine is based on Muhammad's dualism, deception, jihad, and conquest. ISIS follows it to the letter. Islamic doctrine wraps it all into "religion."