Sunday, November 17, 2013

"Islam needs an intervention"

Roger Simon, with my commentary.

Islam needs an intervention
Indeed, like a badly failing family member — an alcoholic or a drug addict — what Islam desperately needs now is not nuclear appeasement or CAIR-style “tolerance” but an intervention. 
To say that something is decidedly wrong in the Islamic world is a monumental understatement. And Muslim societies make almost no serious effort to correct themselves, ricocheting back and forth between military totalitarianism and religious totalitarianism while — like that family heroin addict — blaming everyone but themselves for their fate.
They are indeed in deep need of an intervention. The question is how to do it. 
Are you thinking what I'm thinking?
Of course, just by raising that question you are accused of Islamophobia, an absurd almost self-contradictory term, which always applies better to those using it. They are the ones who are phobic about Islam because they are the ones who are fearful (actually terrified) of what Islamic people will do if told the truth. So they come up with those equally absurd lies, like defining the crime of a soldier who murders his fellows while shouting “Allahu Akhbar” as “workplace violence.” 
The actual "Islamophobes" are the folks who are so afraid of Islam that they won't tell the truth about it.
This real Islamophobia has been the pathetic stance of our government and military since 9/11, made worse by the delusions of Barack Obama. Of course it has failed. How could it possibly succeed when it is fundamentally dishonest? 
Meanwhile, another large sector of our society wants us to throw up our hands at the whole thing — let these madmen destroy each other. I am sympathetic — how could I not be? We have already lost so much in treasure, human and material. 
But I will remind those people — and myself — that in our tradition we are our brother’s keeper. And that is one of the most important values, if not the key value, that gave us this great country. 
We are not Islam's keeper. Let Allah sort it out. But if they attack us, we should defend ourselves with vigor.
Furthermore, such a violent ideology left unchecked could destroy the world. It already infects over a billion Muslims, with painfully rare, though highly laudable, exceptions. 
"Infects". Yes. It is a disease of the human soul.
(The depressing truth is that I met almost all of them in my job at PJM. Where are the rest? Why is it there is no really organized attempt within Islam for any kind of serious reform — only the most momentary lip service after a terror attack?)
Carnage like the events in Pakistan and Kenya have widespread support in the Muslim world.

Islam is a deadly heresy-- a form of Arianism. You can see why the Church fought heretics with such ferocity. Heresies are deadly business. Eventually Islam will come to widespread military conflict with the West. It will be demolished militarily-- there has not been since the Battle of Vienna any Muslim army that can take the field against an Western army and survive more than a few days.

Islam will not stop murdering innocents and the West will not tolerate it forever. The real horror in all of this is that while there is no doubt that Islam and the West will come to widespread war, and that Islam will lose militarily, the Western armies may fight under the flag of fascism, which is on the rise in Europe in the wake of the eclipse of Christianity.

The world will pay an enormous price for tossing aside Christian faith. 

37 comments:

  1. Adm. G Boggs, Glenbeckistan NavyNovember 17, 2013 at 8:02 AM

    I agree completely.

    Not only is Islam an example of the Arian heresy, which by the way was soundly refuted by the great Patriarch St Athanasius of Alexandria (a saint whose work, On the Incarnation, should be read by all Christians) in the 4th Century AD, it is also the source of Occasionalism:

    Though the term “occasional cause” has been suggested as originating with the French philosopher Louis de la Forge (Carraud 2002, 347), the first philosophers to explicitly expound the position were the Islamic occasionalists... Islamic occasionalism seems to have emerged when the theologians of the Ash’arite school of kalām (Islamic doctrinal theology) began to consider the implications of the systematic reinterpretation, development, and integration of Aristotelianism and Neo-Platonism that occurred within the Islamic intellectual world in the tenth and eleventh centuries...
    --- Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

    Occasionalism is the philosophy that regards planting of nail bombs in pizza parlors, rocket attacks on civilian cities, and the flying of airliners into buildings to be causally justified as "Acts of God". "God did it" not only relieves the causal actor of responsibility for his acts, it justifies those acts as "God's will".

    It's also important to understand that true phobias are disorders, not because they discriminate against spiders and snakes, but because they are irrational fears of harm that unnecessarily disrupt lives.

    But some things are truly dangerous, like unexploded munitions or rabid dogs. It is not irrational to fear them.

    It is not irrational to be wary of individuals who: (a) regard beheading, torture, and mass murder for religious reasons as "the will of God", (b) who go so far as claim that wonderful rewards will be reaped in heaven as a result of these demented acts, and (c) lionize the murderers with political office and international recognition (e.g., Yasser Arafat, Nobel Peace Prize 1994).

    Unfortunately, some individuals are intellectually crippled by ridiculous multicultural ideologies and orthodoxies, and cannot truly comprehend the evil they face:

    In his address to the U.N. General Assembly (September 24, 2013), U.S. President Barack Obama stated: "The Supreme Leader has issued a fatwa against the development of nuclear weapons." In fact, such a fatwa was never issued by Supreme Leader Khamenei and does not exist; neither the Iranian regime nor anybody else can present it

    The deception regarding "Khamenei's fatwa" has been promoted by the Iranian regime and its spokesmen for several years. Each time it was mentioned, the "fatwa" was given a different year of issue – for example, 2005, 2007, or 2012 – but the text of the "fatwa" was never presented...

    --- MEMRI.org

    ReplyDelete
  2. Exactly! We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity.

    Ann Coulter

    ReplyDelete
  3. Agree, absolutely. First of all, we should invade Iraq. This is the most pressing issue. Once, in 1991, there was a thriving Christian community of 500,000 there. Now there are just 150,000 - perhaps as few as 50,000 - with religiously motivated attacks on Christian churches a regular event.

    Many of the missing Iraqi Christians have left the country, but many have undoubtedly been murdered.

    And the next target should be Saudi Arabia, which provided most of the terrorists of the 9/11 attacks.

    I volunteer Crusader Rex and Admiral G Bloggs to lead the military campaign of liberation with Michael Egnor to command the medical support team.

    It should be easy and cheap to do. Toppling Saddam Hussein only cost 3 trillion dollars.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't support invading anybody. Our Crusade needs to be intellectual and legal, and most of all spiritual.

      But this is the truth: Islam is a violent noxious ideology, and the likely military response from the West will be Fascist.

      We will pay a heavy price for abandoning Christianity.

      Delete
    2. What would the legal crusade entail, doc? Outlawing mosques? And what would be the spiritual component? Mass conversion of muslims?

      Hoo

      Delete
    3. The legal measures are obvious-- find and prosecute terrorists.

      Mass conversion of Muslims? Of course.

      Delete
    4. Could you be a little more specific, doc, and outline your program of mass conversion?

      Hoo

      Delete
    5. Preach the Gospel everywhere. In Muslim countries where it is illegal, work to make it legal (international pressure to guarantee religious freedom, etc).

      Pray a lot.

      Think St. Paul.

      Delete
    6. Interesting concept: using religious freedom to suppress religious freedom.

      Just sayin'.

      Hoo

      Delete
  4. Islam is replete with internal issues and schisms. There is no real need for military engagement, unless our interests are threatened.
    That said, we do not need to be frightened or acquiescent.
    I submit that a policy of reciprocity is the most sane approach. I do not mean terror attack for terror attack by that. I am speaking of cultural / national reciprocity. If, say, an Islamic state is intolerant of different belief systems to the extent those people are marginalized, then we should institute similar restrictive immigration, social, and legal policies for that group. If a sect within Islam preaches this intolerance, it should be delegitimized and ruled/judged a violent cult.
    Economically the best thing we can do is redirect our energy markets to domestic production. No two ways. We need to do whatever it takes to make that transition work without crushing the economies of ourselves and our allies. This would be difficult and require controls and incentives that would seem draconian to some of the anarcho-capitalist types, but I feel it is essential to defund the jihad(s).
    As for military interactions and conflicts: When needed. There is, however, a balance to be struck. These nations have made a serious art out of playing proxy for major powers. They go where the best deal is.
    Then there is the issue of expansionism. When the Islamic states attempt to push into neighbouring regions, we should check that progress. Again, please do not mistake my suggestion for Marshal plan style nation building or carpet bombing and/or drone strikes. I mean serious engagement of the real capacities of these groups and nations. If possible, we should make use of our own proxies to do so.
    On the heretical nature/error of Islam: Boggs has delineated the heretical nature of the ideology precisely, and the Doctor has hit very well on it in the post as well. No need for me to add to it.
    Finally, when it comes to the term Islamophobic (repelled by Islam), I find it to be an utterly Orwellian mess. If one must choose between being attracted to Islam (philic) and repelled (phobic), then all non Muslims who have not intention of converting are Islamophobes. If, on the other hand, the term is used (as it often is) to describe a latent phobia, then it is totally inaccurate. Most people who are described as 'phobic' of Islam are actually engaged in some sort of conflict with that faith. Either they are actually, physically fighting them or engaged in a PR/rhetorical/political struggle with that ideology or extreme members thereof.
    Either way you dress it, the term is stupid. There are bigots who hate ALL Muslims, just as there are bigots who hate ALL Christians, whites, black, gays, women etc.
    But the term is BIGOT. No need for newspeak. Never any need for it, actually... unless you're a programmed, trendy, little drone.
    My tuppence.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Adm. G Boggs, Glenbeckistan NavyNovember 17, 2013 at 10:38 AM

      C-Rex: "Economically the best thing we can do is redirect our energy markets to domestic production."

      You nailed it there, Sir. In fact, doing so not only is in our best interests for other reasons (geopolitical and economic), it can be beneficial for individual citizens. In 2011, when it was clear that the McLightworker Administration was not going to approve the Keystone Pipeline, I bought stock in Canadian Pacific Railroad. A railroad is just a rolling pipeline. CP has been very, very good to me.

      Here's a report from ND:

      -- 35-40 trains up to one mile long leave here every day. Every tanker car is filled with oil. (Why not via pipeline? Ask the EPA).

      -- The unemployment rate is 0.4%. That's zero-point-four percent. You can sit back down now.

      30 million barrels of oil are coming out of the ground each month and the success rate of each new well is over 95%. It's all fracking. And not a single accident or environmental disaster has occurred.

      -- The Williston area has grown from 12,000 people five years ago to somewhere around 45,000 today. Nobody knows the true number. It may be 60,000. Over 10,000 men (and it's mostly men) bunk in temporary "man camps" surrounding the town.

      -- The local Wal-Mart pays its employees $17 an hour and subsidizes their housing. McDonalds pays $15 per hour plus benefits, and has only recently been open seven days a week due to their inability to hire enough people.

      -- The local newspaper offers $250 signing bonuses to carriers provided they'll deliver papers for a specified length of time.

      -- Every new business builds adjoining housing units so employees have a place to stay.

      -- The Bakken oil field is so huge and so productive it looks like Chicago or Minneapolis at night from space.

      -- Williston is currently #1 in sales of Carhartt work clothing and 2013 Chevy Corvettes.

      --- C.J. Box

      All that, and not one MEU deployed, not one cruise missile fired, not one business bailed out, not one buggywhip green scheme subsidized.

      Delete
    2. Georgie,

      30 million barrels of oil a month is 1/3 of the global consumption of oil per day. 8 hours of consumption. Perhaps 32 hours of American consumption.

      Where is the remainder going to come from? The trouble with fracking is that the oil companies go for the best sites first. We don't know whether production can be maintained at these rates, let alone increased.

      North Dakota might be left, far more quickly than you think, with degraded infrastructure, such as roads (due to the heavy truck transport of the fracking equipment), no significant economy and no means to pay for the damage.

      Delete
    3. Adm. G Boggs, Glenbeckistan NavyNovember 17, 2013 at 4:34 PM

      Technology for extracting previously inaccessible oil and gas resources in the United States, along with increases in biofuels production and improved vehicle efficiency, could lead to a situation where the United States produces as much energy as it uses by 2035, according to the recently released World Energy Outlook 2012 from the International Energy Agency (see “Natural Gas Changes the Energy Map”). By 2020, the U.S. will surpass Saudi Arabia as the world’s largest oil producer, although Saudi Arabia is expected to catch up within a few years.
      --- MIT Technology Review (11/13/2012)

      blinkfast: "North Dakota might be left, far more quickly than you think, with degraded infrastructure, such as roads (due to the heavy truck transport of the fracking equipment), no significant economy and no means to pay for the damage."

      Doom! Apocalypse! The end is near! All is lost! Abandon hope all ye who enter here!!!

      Lighten up, blinkfast. Enough with the prophecies. You must be channeling St Malthus today.

      Delete
    4. Georgie,

      'could lead to a situation in which the United States produces as much energy as it uses by 2035'.

      Sounds like a prediction to me. Based on undiscovered technology and reserves of shale gas and tight oil not currently economically recoverable - either too expensive or requiring more energy to recover than contained in the resource.

      Delete
    5. Adm. G Boggs, Glenbeckistan NavyNovember 17, 2013 at 5:27 PM

      barkmad: "Sounds like a prediction to me."

      You're right. But the MIT Technology Review or the IEA (AFAIK) isn't noted for a permanent negative or positive bias. Some other sources are.

      And your comment I quoted above did, you must admit, have a tinge of Malthusian morbidity. It also seemed a bit Precautionary Principleistic, and, personally speaking, I view the Precautionary Principle as a Luddite ban on technological and civilizational progress.

      Delete
    6. Georgie,

      Predictions concerning possible energy supplies in 2035 are based on highly uncertain variables. Including possible technology, reported reserves of oil and gas, etc.

      Oil exploration companies have an incentive to report optimistic estimates of their reserves to get investor funding. MIT collating rubbish still equals rubbish.

      As I've noted Bakken supplies just 32 hours of America's current oil needs (which is only a percentage of energy needs). It would need to be increased twenty fold to meet current needs.

      How?

      Anyway. Hope for the best, and plan for the worst.

      Delete
  5. Just to be clear, I share some of Egnor's sentiments, although I would express them differently. In my view, Islam as a religion will have to adopt to the changing world for the good of its adherents.

    The need to modernize is hardly new and the problem is more theirs than ours. The problem is also not entirely religious: it is also a problem of culture and government. Mass conversion to Christianity is neither a practical option nor a solution to problems transcending religion.

    Hoo

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The real fear of mass conversion to Christianity is the reason that proselytizing is illegal in many Muslim countries. If the imams didn't fear it, they wouldn't ban it.

      "Failure to modernize" is not the problem. Terrorists are often the most educated and modern of Muslims.

      The answer to totalitarianism atheism and violent Islam and indulgent commercialism is Christ.

      Delete
    2. In your book, Christ is the answer to everything, doc. Maybe you should quit your day job and go proselytizing.

      Hoo

      Delete
    3. @Hoo:

      [In your book, Christ is the answer to everything]

      That's what Christianity is. Is this news to you, Hoo?

      Delete
    4. That would be overkill. To simplify, Christianity does not tell you how to do brain surgery, does it? You have learned that at a secular medical school.

      A simple point, really.

      Hoo

      Delete
  6. The only hope is a more secular Islam. Saying “My God is better than your God” and boasting “we will crush you in the inevitable Christian war” simply fans the flames, and is entirely counterproductive.

    -KW

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, unfortunately you are correct.

      What's worse, it's wrong to claim a Christian Western 'military' superiority. Plain wrong I'm afraid.

      Who are these 'superior' soldiers? Where are they going to come from? What will they be fighting for? What would 'victory' look like?

      Spain needs to eat before it fights.

      Germany has a massive demographic timebomb that is due to explode in about 15 years. Where will the soldiers come from? Germans (incredibly) already believe that 'Europe' owes them a favor. It is incredible to imagine they would die to protect western lap dancing bars or homosexual marches. Would you?
      Anyway, friends who have taught in Germany describe many100% Muslim schools in 100% Muslim areas. Are they going to crusade to save the National Lottery or the Bikini.
      Would you?

      As for GB.

      I have friends who served in both Gulf 'Wars'.
      One, a high ranking Commanding Officer in one of our few remaining half decent* outfits told me a while ago that "Not One." fellow Officer believed the lie about WMD before the invasion.

      This is deadly serious.
      This is how civilisations fall. This is why we could never win a war against a determined enemy. This is why your (US) military IS BEING PURGED AS WE SPEAK. Purged of decent humane Christians who would never follow ANY order.

      It is later than you think if you imagine the contemporary west would even FIGHT a war against a determined enemy.
      It would not.
      We have rotted from the head down.
      There is no civilisation left to defend.
      At this rate Islam will not be invading anyone; they just won't be destroying their unborn children. Mathematics will do the rest.
      These are uncomfortable facts.
      If God gave you the discernment to know this, then it is surly a sin to ignore the truth.

      My friend in the forces has long explained he will 'get out' of this country after his full pension is earned (an absolute fortune in the same manner as the old legionaries).

      He's been in all his life.
      He cannot stand the thought of living in his homeland. Nuff said.



      *English for World Class

      Delete
  7. Islam is NOT our most dangerous enemy.

    For Christians this is a dangerous and seductive delusion.

    Degenerate (secular) 'values' are.

    These 'values' have been energised and even given legal forces by the Bad People who came and hijacked western institutions (political parties, law, medicine) some time after 1945.

    Islam in the West is a consequence and symptom of these degenerate 'values' (never it's cause).

    I worry for Christian friends of mine who identify Islam as a great threat to the West. Still, they see no evil in the slaughter of Iraqi Muslims, Jews & Christians.
    Iraq was not even an Islamic State. Most here will know it had Mosques, Churches & Synagogues.Then 'we' destroyed them in the name of peace & stability.
    The Bad People who took over the West ARM and protect the most dangerous Islamic State.

    Thank God for the Egyptian Muslims who pledged to rebuild the Churches destroyed by Obama's' Muslim Brotherhood puppets.

    These Muslims are not our enemy. The Internationalist/Global Agenda is.

    Hating people who profess a love of God is all very well, but who is making the laws you/we live under. Am I correct in my reading the 'Obama Care' Af/Ca/Act removes a nurse's right to refuse to perform abortions (with a Doctor)?

    If that is correct, then worrying about the Islamic Heresy is a luxury you cannot afford.

    Bad People came and took over your county. Start there. The rest is self indulgent.

    Last week my school in Redbridge, Essex received a memo: no singing any songs with 'Lord' or 'Mary'; no saying 'Happy Christmas' to anyone under any circumstances.

    This is not the work of Muslims.

    ONLY the WEST can destroy ITSELF and we are 3/4 there.

    Islam is a distraction. You are deceived. Our enemies are running our countries already. There is no 'creeping Islamisation'; the take over has already happened.


    ReplyDelete
  8. http://newmediajournal.us/indx.php/item/11062

    http://tinyurl.com/winslowplan

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I followed the link.

      It commenced thus.......

      'So you took my Free Online Islam History Course, and have caught up with the last 1400 years of the horror show, and want to know how Islam can be exterminated despite "1.5 billion Muslims", and in a humane manner.'


      I am not thrilled by the energy some derive from hating. I don't want that to sound 'superior' it's just not a problem of mine.

      I didn't read much beyond that.

      'Extermination'?
      It's Darwin all over again.....I just don't have the time to go exterminating anyone these days.

      I'm more interested in Christianity and in my own salvation to be honest.

      JR

      Delete
  9. Islam is a deadly heresy-- a form of Arianism. You can see why the Church fought heretics with such ferocity. Heresies are deadly business.

    Adherents of the various branches of Islam are all equally certain, as you are, that theirs is The One True Religion and that heretics will burn in hell forever. Of course you are all equally wrong.

    Eventually Islam will come to widespread military conflict with the West.

    No they won't. Not unless the Chinese convert to Islam.

    The real horror in all of this is that while there is no doubt that Islam and the West will come to widespread war, and that Islam will lose militarily, the Western armies may fight under the flag of fascism, which is on the rise in Europe in the wake of the eclipse of Christianity.

    Fascism previously found very fertile ground in Christian nations such as Germany, Italy and Croatia, and right now it seems more on the rise in the US than in Europe, so you're also wrong on this count.

    Like shooting fish a barrel.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Adm. G Boggs, Glenbeckistan NavyNovember 17, 2013 at 4:48 PM

      Troi: "Fascism previously found very fertile ground in [Europe]."

      Right.

      [T]he Netherlands saw one of the highest levels of collaboration during the Holocaust of any occupied country. 75% of the country's Jewish population were killed during the conflict; a much higher percentage than comparable countries, like Belgium and France...
      --- Wiki: Netherlands in World War II

      At that time, Belgium and France were also more Catholic.

      Delete
    2. I suspect that Grandpa is blaming the Protestants.

      Hoo

      Delete
    3. Adm. G Boggs, Glenbeckistan NavyNovember 17, 2013 at 6:39 PM

      Hoots: "I suspect that Grandpa is blaming the Protestants."

      As usual, your suspicions are unfounded. I'm merely pointing out to Troi that Europe, not North America, South America, or the Anglo antipodes (which are as nominally Christian as Europe), is the historical hotbed for Fascism. So it obviously isn't Christianity that breeds Fascism.

      Troi's bigotry is no different than that of anti-Semites who blame Wall St excesses or the poverty of Gaza Palestinians on "the Jews". It's just Bull Connor KKK bullshit in different clothing.

      Delete
    4. Grandpa,

      What was the point of mentioning a smaller percentage of Catholics in the WWII Netherlands? The country was effectively 100-percent Christian at the time. Fewer Catholics, more Protestants.

      Why did you mention, it again?

      Hoo

      Delete
    5. I'm merely pointing out to Troi that Europe, not North America, South America, or the Anglo antipodes (which are as nominally Christian as Europe), is the historical hotbed for Fascism. So it obviously isn't Christianity that breeds Fascism.

      Oh, is that what you were merely pointing out? Fascism is a European thing. I see. Then why the reference to the Dutch collaboration with the Nazi's and pointing out that Belgians and French were more Catholic than the Dutch? Hmm?

      Delete
    6. Adm. G Boggs, Glenbeckistan NavyNovember 17, 2013 at 7:11 PM

      Troi" "Then why the reference..."

      If you recall, the last time you brought up Fascism, it was in the context of Croatian Catholics and went on to blame Catholicism.

      So Fascism is not due to Catholicism specifically or Christianity in general.

      Fascism is a European thing.

      Delete
    7. I wonder what the outcome would be if someone would correlate the proportion of Catholics in a country with the likelihood the country having a fascist leadership. I'm guessing the correlation is positive.

      Delete
    8. Fascism is a European thing.

      Nah. Not really. Latin American Catholic countries had their fair share of fascist regimes. With the blessing of The Church of course.

      I understand you're embarrassed.

      Delete
    9. Adm. G Boggs, Glenbeckistan NavyNovember 17, 2013 at 7:20 PM

      Specifically?

      BTW, Peronism is not Fascism.

      And you're the one who should be embarrassed. Bigotry is so 1939.

      Delete