If such perceptions were true, that would make these tragic events Muslim terrorist acts. Even if there was some grand conspiracy, the fact is that these terrorist acts have been used by Muslim terrorists themselves to continue to terrorize the world. (Who was behind 9/11 is an important aside: The point here is that Muslim fanatics themselves have been using 9/11 as a club, as in the accompanying photo and as in sermons by imams extolling the "virtuous" sacrifice of the "19 Martyrs." And, by the way, I've been reading the conspiracy theories since the first days after 9/11. I am well aware of practically every major player and aspect of those theories. This is not a discussion of those theories.)
The dishonesty and cowardice of the mainstream press - and the world's governments! - in addressing honestly this critical issue of identifying Islamic terrorism as Islamic will spell doom for the free world, as the Islamic terrorism continues relatively unabated, with appeasement of all manner, including throwing women to the wolves. Most dangerous of all, agencies like the U.N. are virtually controlled by Islamic countries that are forcing an agenda of censorship of anything relating to Islam, including criticism of the abysmal treatment of women and non-Muslims.
The censorship has gotten so bad that news and government agencies bend over backwards NOT to bring Islam into the picture, even if the perpetrator of a violent crime has admitted to acting in the name of Islam! Soon will we be forced to accept all kinds of violent crimes so long as they are committed in the name of Islam, since we will not be able to bring up the subject at all? Islamic warriors terrorizing people in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Indonesia and elsewhere globally - it will be illegal to identify them as Islamic, even if they call themselves the "Army of Allah!"
Obviously, all such laws restricting criticism of any religion should be rejected immediately.
That would include Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism and Buddhism, of course, these latter two being the least warmongering and proselytizing.
(Translation by N.J. Dawood: The Koran: With a Parallel Arabic Text, Penguin Classics, 1991)As we might guess, these are some the Islamic teachings leading to Islamic terror. Would not these remarks constitute hate speech under the laws being tossed up all over the place in order to protect Islam?
This Book is not to be doubted.... As for the unbelievers, it is the same whether or not you forewarn them; they will not have faith. God has set a seal upon their hearts and ears; their sight is dimmed and grievous punishment awaits them. --Q 2:1-2:6-2:10; "The Cow," Dawood, pp. 1-2.
The only true faith in God's sight is Islam. --Q 3:19; "The Imrans," Dawood, p. 51.
He that chooses a religion over Islam, it will not be accepted from him and in the world to come he will be one of the lost. --Q 3:85, "The Imrans," Dawood, p. 60.
God's curse be upon the infidels! Evil is that for which they have bartered away their souls. To deny God's own revelation, grudging that He should reveal His bounty to whom He chooses from among His servants! They have incurred God's most inexorable wrath. An ignominious punishment awaits the unbelievers. --Q 2:89-2:90, "The Cow," Dawood, p. 13.
Fight for the sake of God those that fight against you, but do not attack them first. God does not love the aggressors.
Slay them wherever you find them. Drive them out of the places from which they drove you. Idolatry is worse than carnage.... --Q 2:190-2:191, "The Cow," Dawood, p. 28.
[Note that within Islam, many things can and are interpreted to be "aggression," such that the death penalty is freely handed out.]
When the sacred months are over slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them.... --Q 9:5; "Repentance," Dawood, p. 186.
Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home: an evil fate. --Q 9:73, "Repentance," Dawood, p. 198.
Men have authority over women because God has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because God has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and forsake them in beds apart, and beat them. Then if they obey you, take no further action against them. Surely God is high, supreme. --Q 4:34, "Women," Dawood, p. 83.
And now, here is some Acharya Law:
No individual, group or government should be forced to kowtow to any religion against its will, moral, ethics and laws.
We are reminded of one of the Koranic injunctions that, like Islamic terrorism, is widely ignored as well:
Yet, here the world is being compelled left and right - ultimately through terrorist acts that have turned many into a frightened pack of sheep running willy-nilly - to accept what amounts to spiritual terrorism.
Roars about Russia, Nary a Whisper about Islam
by Diane West
Amazing, how quickly the punditocracy switches maps, time zones and histories, simultaneously mastering new combinations of consonants and vowels, to report and react to a "surprise" conflict in Georgia. It's almost hard to recall that, just a few days ago, the most urgent questions confounding most of the media had to do with just how narcissistic John Edwards really is, or what the ramifications of Barack Obama's plans to announce his vice presidential pick via text message might finally be.
Since the sight of tanks rolling usually has a way of concentrating the media mind, the question has become: Whither Russia?
In truth, the demise of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn earlier this month was a journalistic godsend. After all, who hadn't already dusted off their long-retired Soviet history books -- not to mention their long-retired Soviet history experts, all of whom have had the busiest couple of weeks in years -- by the time Vladimir Putin announced last week that "war has started" over South Ossetia and Abkhazia?
Historical memory somewhat refreshed, Western media were ready with the headlines -- "The evil empire is back"; "Welcome to the 19th century"; "The Russian bear's new teeth" -- to promote the main thrust of most stories: namely, that Russia is reverting to tsarist, expansionist, Soviet-style, empire-amassing type.
It's not that there's anything controversial in this journalistic approach, although I do tend to think there remain aspects of the Georgian story we haven't reconciled. What's noteworthy about this narrative consensus, however, is that the invocation of Russia's historical and cultural record is being made so frankly and without hedging. That is, no one's blaming "Russian extremists," "tsarismists," or "hijackers of a great history." On the contrary, the implication behind most Russia-versus-Georgia stories is that the Russians' world-stage behavior as they smash Georgia is something that this same historical and cultural record tells us that Russians do....
And why is this important? When I started seeing these stories and statements -- even making some of them myself -- I realized there was something free-wheeling about the style of expression that made it different from what has been the norm. I first wondered if there was a somewhat perverse trace of nostalgia in dealing again with the Russians. And then it hit me. In the nearly seven years since Islam has wholly dominated current events, neither our media nor our leaders have ever, not even once, looked at similarly characteristic behavior from the Islamic world and labeled it accordingly.
In other words, no pattern of avowedly Islam-inspired violence in the world has ever earned a headline nearly as straightforward as "Islamic jihad is back." Not even the Islamic success of Motoon Rage, which has severely repressed Western modes of expression regarding Muhammad in particular and Islam in general, inspired anything as descriptive as, for example, "Sharia's new teeth."...
And what American presidential candidate would ever explain the Islamic push, financial and otherwise, in the West for mosque construction, Islamic schools (madrassas), campus Islamic studies (apologetics) departments, Sharia law-inspired legal challenges, lobbying for Sharia-compliant banking and the like as a matter of Islamic imperialism?
I quoted McCain above discussing, matter-of-fact, what he considers to be catchall "Russian" ambitions to restore the "old Russian empire." Would he, or any other American politician, ever say the same regarding catchall "Islamic" ambitions? While both Russia and Islam claim similarly long histories and cultures of conquest for reference, it's mighty tough to imagine any U.S. politician ever saying the following: "I think it's very clear that Islamic ambitions are to restore the old caliphate." (And that's despite a growing body of statements, even polling data, reflecting the persistence of Islamic caliphate dreams.)...
See also this article:
We need to stop being such cowards about Islam