To Infidel

Submitted by Pro-Israeli Democrat (United States), Sep 8, 2006 at 10:03

Very good questions, actually. I actually toil between atheism, agnosticism, and deism (I am actually closer to being an agnostic, rather than an atheist). The reason I declare it is to reveal the importance of protecting the secular, rational values of the West. This way we can rally behind that instead of rallying behind militant religion as a counterweight to militant Islamism. That will lead the West to its inevitable self-destruction.

Islamophobia, though, is unfortunate for a number of reasons. I have come to know many muslims, all of whom are very good people. I can't say I have met an Islamic extremist in person. All of these Muslims, I wish, did not have to suffer because of what is going on in their religion. That said, I have a point of view that is, in essence, very "American." The reality is that American Muslims and immigrants are faring far better than their European counterparts. That, of course, says great things about multicultural, pluralistic America. I am NOT denying that Islamism is a real threat. It is, as Daniel Pipes said, no less than totalitarian ideology #3 (after fascism and communism).

I happen to be VERY critical of Islam as I am of conservative interpreations of the Bible (just look at what has happened in Zanzibar, where a Muslim group is trying to ban celebrations of deceased Queen singer Freddie Mercury's 60th birthday, because the Zoroastrian star just so happened to be bisexual). I happen to be a huge Queen fan, so this action caught my attention pretty quickly, convincing me that Islamists want to outlaw everything. I believe that I could do Theo Van Gogh proud. I also supported Denmark in the Spring '06 cartoon controversy. So, if you are thinking that I am an apologist for jihad, you would be wrong. Islam itself is not a religion of peace; in fact, there is no such thing as a religion of peace per se, with Jainism and Buddhism being possible exceptions.

European countries, though, treat their Muslims like sh*t. This is a specific reference to France and Belgium, and they certainly aren't using the tools to combat radicalism. America is. Islam, for all its varying interpretations, is very different from Islamism. Just look at Khaleel Mohammed, Akbar Ahmed, Hamza Yusuf, and Irshad Manji. These Muslims are our greatest asset in the war against Islamism. Hopefully, they will be able to fight a war withing their civilization to prevent a war between secular, Western civilization and Islamic civilization. Demonizing those Muslims who really want to change things wont help anyone.

That said, the airport screenings are absolutely necessary, and we must take steps to protect ourselves You are right, and I have always agreed. But be warned, Al-Qaeda is clever, and we must be prepared for the day when Al-Qaeda begins using white people who in the eyes of most do not "look like" Muslims...from countries like Bosnia, for instance. In short, EVERYONE, Muslim and non-Muslim must make the sacrifice, and pilots will just have to become accustomed to delay. The concern I was discussing was the coming of Muslim Internment (like Japanese internment during WWII). We should do everything in our power to ensure that this does not happen again. Especially considering our fight to spread democracy and freedom throughout the world.

Now for question #3: This is actually a reference to the caricatures of the Jews that were all over Germany during the Nazi era, but books like the forged Protocols of the Elders of Zion also contributed to the notion that we were "less than human." And indeed, in the years and decades leading up to the Holocaust, that is how we were portrayed (even in CHILDREN'S BOOKS!) All one has to do is look at anti-semitic propaganda from that era. Of cvourse, in many Muslim countries, this still goes on, leading many Muslim children to say that their elders have made them "fear the Jews."

Question #4: If Islamism is totalitarian ideology #3 (which I think it is), then fundamentalist Christianity is totalitarian ideology #4. Just look at what they want to do. What they are calling for is not an America based on Judeo-Christian values, but an America based on evangelical Christian values. As for taking over the world, just listen to how they want to convert the Jews to Christ to "herald his return." This is much closer in concept to messianic, Shiite Islam (or, in narrower terms, Khomeinism) than it is to garden variety Christianity (progressive evangelicals, Catholics, Presbyterians, Episcopalians, etc.) They also talk about the war on militant islam as if it were another war between crescent and cross; in 2006, this is extremely dangerous.

With that, the Crusaders killed much of what lay in their path; Muslims, Christians, Jews, etc. A lot of Armenian Christians were killed during the Crusades. Many Eastern Christians also died during the first Crusade, and the Crusaders also duped the Byzantine Empire into believing that they were actually allied with them. Instead, they seized territory that they had promised to give to the Byzantines. During the early stages, the Crusaders perpetrated an enormous massacre of Jews. They were, in truth, very similar to the Wahhabis of today, in that violence and hatred were not limited to the Muslims whom they were fighting. Contrary to what Robert Spencer (who I consider a political pundit, rather than a true Catholic scholar) says, the Crusades were not defensive wars, either. Are the atrocious HAMAS and Islamic Jihad suicide bombings against Israeli Civilians in a futile effort to recapture Jerusalem defensive wars? Absolutely not, and such a notion is an abhorrent. apology for jihad and terrorism and a huge disservice to the Israelis. The same logic applies to the Crusades, in which the perpetrators struck first and killed more or less everyone (not just Muslims) in, of course, an effort to recapture Jerusalem. I am not going to apologize for Crusader Christianity just because the Crusaders happened to be fighting Islamic Arabs and Turks.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".