The West is Going to Lose If These Two Mistakes Stand Uncorrected
Reader comment on item: How the West Could Lose
Submitted by VanGuard (United States), Jan 15, 2007 at 16:33
There are two self-deceptive mistakes persistently being made by US authorities and the media elite that --if left uncorrected--could prove fatal in history:
The first mistake is accurately expressed by the following quote:
"…… the government and media elites …. assume, that any Muslim who is not engaged in violence acts or planning for violent acts in the name of Islam is automatically also opposed to violent acts in the name of Islam." A Lebanese Christian, Brigitte Gabriel, spoke of her childhood, living as a Christian in Lebanon. She said, "We had multiculturalism. We believed in diversity… but the Muslims had different plans. Once they became the majority, they declared jihad on Christians. The Muslims consider us infidels. That's why they want to kill us. Media wrongly reported this conflict as a civil war. Only Israel understood the evil we were fighting." Visit Ms. Gabriel's website "American Congress for Truth" at http://americancongressfortruth.com/profile.asp.
The real truth is, an overwhelmingly large majority of "moderate" Muslims who are not engaged in violence acts or planning for violent acts in the name of Islam, tacitly condone or even jubilate to the violent acts. The impression they keep making to the secular world, as if they have nothing to do with the violence, is driven by self-preservation tactic called "al-Taqiyya", i.e., "lying to non-Muslims to earn salvation" in times they are weak and overpowered (see <http://www.hauns.com/~DCQu4E5g/koran5.html> and the Muslim website <http://www.al-islam.org/ENCYCLOPEDIA/chapter6b/1.html>). This "dissimulation" tactic is based on Qur'an verses 3:28 and 16:106. The deceptive attitude will radically change as soon as they gain the upper hand. The al-Taqiyya tactic has been practiced by the prophet Muhammad himself during the Hijra from Mecca to Medina in 622 AD. In Mecca Muhammad and his followers were overpowered by the majority, and hence, had to give themselves as "tolerant" and "peaceful". In Medina they gained upper hand, and therefore suddenly became vengeful, belligerent and bloodthirsty.
Most of the hateful, violent and evil Qur'an verses originated from this later phase of Islamic history. In this respect, the relatively tolerant Qur'an verses from the Mecca period are considered by all Muslims --the militants as well as the moderates, the Shiites as also the Sunnis-- as having been ultimately abrogated by the vengeful and bellicose verses from the Medina period. In recent history such a change of attitude is observed to start in 1973, after some Islamic states have accumulated sufficient wealth to challenge the free world and discovered the ultimate power of oil as leverage against the secular nations. For just the same reason Iran shall never be allowed to achieve nuclear capability, since it will certainly will be used as a weapon to conquer and annihilate their archenemies, i.e., the "infidel" nations.
A small minority among Islamic states who seem to want to have nothing to do with the violence are actually driven by selfishness to continue to earn advantage from the western world (which actually preserves and nurture their existence), while patiently waiting for a good opportunity to push their own agenda, i.e., to Islamize the entire world. To this minority belong our Islamic "allies", ranging from Saudi Arabia to Indonesia. They pursue a common al-Taqiyya tactic, i.e., officially joining the secular world by giving lip-service to anti-terrorism, but --under the table-- tacitly and secretly supporting the terrorists by material, financial, logistic, educational and other infrastructural means.
An effective way to remedy the mistake identified above is, from now on "to assume that any Muslim who does not openly condemn and actively oppose the violence acts carried out by their fellow Muslims is automatically also guilty of accomplice to the violent perpetrators in the name of Islam."
Falsely recognizing that only some individuals are evil terrorists, but denying the fact that Islam is inherently an evil religion. Politically-correct authorities and the media elite persistently insist and try to educate the public that Islam is a benign religion, or even a "peaceful" religion. Such a mistake is almost always being made by those who NEVER read the al-Qur'an and/or ignorant of the history of Islam. The truth is, the Islamic religion is inherently an evil religion based on violence, as correctly interpreted by the Pope Benedict XVI (while avoiding legal liability). Everybody who has read the al-Qur'an and has a pre-knowledge of other religion(s) to allow comparison would immediately recognize that the Islamic teaching is EVIL. It is the good human nature of a handful of its followers that gives the Islamic religion sometimes a deceiving impression of a "peaceful" and "tolerant" religion. The origin of, or cause for, this deceptive impression is all-too-obvious: About a half of human beings are peaceful and tolerant, whereas the other half are evil and violent. Accordingly, the interpretation of al Qur'an they made is commensurate with these two classifications (although not much can be done to change the intrinsically-evil verses of al-Qur'an, which are quite numerous indeed; see later).
...More specifically, Qur'an teaching is capable of transforming a good personality into a bellicose hate-monger and terrorist (especially under difficult personal circumstances), while an evil person will find great satisfaction in the Islamic teaching, e.g., in "jihad", in which he/she can project his personal enemies onto "unbelievers" without feeling personal guilt or conflict with human conscience. In contrast, most other religions, except for some cults, usually try to turn a violent or evil person into a benign and good one.
Thus, Islam is more like a CULT, which provides a person leeway to act-out his primordial instincts to victimize his fellow human beings, here legalized by restricting their aggression to unbelievers. Such instincts are innerly based on envy, jealousy, hatred and grudge, the primordial nature of which is best manifested in the biblical story of Cain and Abel. Another kind of animal instincts promoted by Islam, as exemplified by prophet Muhammad himself, are primitive sexual instincts, here manifested in a large number of notorious verses regarding women, marriage, and sexual rewards in heaven.
While other religions usually try to suppress those animal instincts because they are harmful for human society, the Islam allows -- even encourages -- its followers to dump such instincts onto their enemies, i.e., the unbelievers. Unlike other religions, Islam has never turned an evil person into a good person, or a violent person into a peaceful and tolerant one. Instead, Islam usually turns a benign and good person into an aggressive and belligerent one.
The Thai people in Thailand are well known for their passive and peaceful character. However, in southern Thailand where Islam is spreading, the Muslim Thais are as aggressive, vengeful and bloodthirsty as their fellow Muslims in the Middle East. The same thing is also found in Indonesia. There is a striking contrast in attitude and character between the people of the island Bali, who are Hindus, and those of the neighboring island Lombok, who are Muslims. Those who deny this fact are cordially invited to present his case by an opposite but real example.
For all these reasons, a correct tactic to stop the spread of Islam and Islamic violence is: Appealing to the good human virtue(s) in a (particular) Muslim opponent as a second person (without referring to religion, similar to the European Enlightenment in the 18th century), while --by way of reason-- harshly rejecting the Islamic teaching as a third party for being an evil religion. Every Muslim who wants to live in our secular society must be educated to feel guilty and ashamed for openly revealing his/her primitive instincts.
This recommendable tactic is precisely the opposite of what some government authority and our media elite are currently practicing, i.e., praising Islam as a "peaceful religion" as a second party, while dumping all the evils to the terrorists as third party individuals without any reference to their religion. The latter is obviously against the facts: Islam is not a peaceful religion, but a violent and evil religion, whereby the root, or source, for the evil actions perpetrated by the terrorists is nothing else than the Qur'an itself! .
The failure of US politics in Iraq is also caused by the same double mistakes: It is not at all sufficient to establish a pro-forma "democracy", insofar as the new regime is still operating on a religious basis. The genuine Islamic teaching as taught by al-Qur'an and by Muhammad himself is inherently and fundamentally ANTI-democratic. A new democratic Iraqi regime has to consist of individuals who have sincere intention to reform Islam with a long-term objective to abolish Islam down to its roots. As long as the new regime is still guided by Islamic principles instead of reason in running the government, there will be no true democracy, but only a temporary and fake democracy that will subsequently fall back to Islamic theocracy and turn itself against us and the secular world as soon as the US troop has left, since it is al-Taqiyya that is actually practiced by such a regime.
As a matter of fact, the proponents of politically-correct tactic do not apply their reason in a correct and consequent manner: If we are ready to accept that some religious Cult can be inherently evil, why cannot we accept that the true Islam, as taught by its prophet Muhammad through the al-Qur'an, is intrinsically an evil religion, too? The only way to stop Islam is to educate our society to abandon our self-deceiving political correctness and be willing to recognize, realize and accept the fact that Islam is an evil religion. By taking such a position we apply constant moral pressure on all Muslims living in our secular society and in the whole world. Only then can we hope that Islam would undergo a metamorphosis into a benign religion. This futuristic vision is parallel to the history of Christian religion during the periods of Renaissance and Enlightenment. However, such a metamorphosis will be much more difficult to occur in Islam; there is even no guarantee of success. Contrary to al-Qur'an, the Bible teaching is intrinsically benign; It is the medieval church authorities who were belligerent and violent in implementing their obsession to power.
This is exactly the opposite to Islam: The Islamic teaching is intrinsically violent by fomenting hate, envy, and all kinds of primordial instincts; It is the virtues of human nature of their followers who are benign. Another historic aspect that speaks against possible Islamic metamorphosis is, reformation in Islam has been once defeated and their proponents exterminated. A repeat of history is here more likely to happen. The recent rise of Islamic fundamentalism worldwide further indicates that any attempt to change Islam from outside is more likely to fail. Instead of reforming themselves, the radicals and extremists (will) win the majority and effectively reject any outside influence by preserving the "purity" of Islam, back to what it was originally dictated by their prophet Muhammad more than 1400 years ago. (See "Islam Can Not Be Reformed" by Sheik Yer'mami, Dec 24, 2006, http://sheikyermami.com/2006/12/04/words-of-sir-winston/)
The two mistakes discussed above arise from a single cause: Their proponents did not read the al-Qur'an, but dare to make decisions and/or opinion regarding al-Qur'an. In this regard, even Daniel Pipes makes a similar mistake [2,3] by saying: "One cannot pick it [Qur'an] up and understand its meaning when nearly every sentence is the subject of annotation, commentaries, glosses, and superglosses." Pipes' opinion is, instead of reading and studying the Qur'an and Islamic theology to understand Islam, one has to study the specific interpretations of individual Islamic movements such as the Wahhabi, Khomeini and Al-Qaeda. Pipes' first mistake is, one can not understand those Islamic sects without first reading and understanding its source, the al-Qur'an. His second mistake is, studying specific Islamic sects inevitably also includes the more benign Ahmadyah and Sikhism, thus resulting in self-contradicting and confusing results, since the latter are, in fact, twisting the al-Qur'an away from what it was originally taught, meant and exemplified by Muhammad, the prophet. The truth is quite contrary to Pipes: The apparently benign interpretations of Qur'an are made by the HUMAN aspect of a person, since human beings on the average are presumably 50% good and 50% evil. On the other hand, the Islam or the Qur'an itself as a religious teaching is fundamentally and intrinsically evil like a cult; it is nothing else but the crazy idea of a schizophrenic prophet Muhammad, who was a genuine psychopath (peace be upon him). It is quite an understandable human behavior, if -- upon being confronted with an evil Qur'an -- the good human beings among the followers will try to interpret their "holy" book in a benign way (seemingly without much success). This is simply because they do not find any other way to negate or change Islam, to which they are totally delivered by having been born into, unless they are ready to bear the consequences of severe punishment for apostasy (Surah 3:90-91, 16:106, 4:137, most importantly, Surah 5:54). In this respect, Islam is like a "black hole", which tends to gorge everything down with no chance to escape. To stop the advance and growth of Islam we have to strip-off this black hole property: The Shari'a law that threatens apostates with severe punishment should be abolished and outlawed on the basis of religious freedom. Towards that effect we shall take a first step within our own secular society by declaring such a Shari'a law as unconstitutional. This means, individuals and/or organizations who try to implement that particular Islamic law (as well as many other laws which are similarly unacceptable) shall be consequently punished as criminals. This is a crucial step that we have to make, insofar as we now are still be able to, before it becomes too late, i.e., when the black hole effect starts to irreversibly suck our entire free world.
 WorldNetDaily, January 12, 2007 (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52184)
"Suicide bombers follow Qur'an," concludes Pentagon briefing. Tasked with pinpointing motivation, analysts find terrorists 'rational actors' following 'holy book'.
 Daniel Pipes in New York Sun (Jan. 20, 2004): the Middle East scholar Daniel Pipes argues that we ought not to read the Koran to understand Islamic terrorism. "[R]eading the Koran," he writes, "is precisely the wrong way to go about understanding ‘what's happening in our world'…."
 "Daniel Pipes Is Wrong ... People Should Read the Koran to Learn About Muslim Terrorism" (http://hnn.us/articles/3902.html) by Irfan Khawaja, adjunct professor of philosophy at the College of New Jersey, is a columnist for Pakistan Today.
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".
Reader comments (2097) on this item
Comment on this item
You can help support Daniel Pipes' work by making a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum. Daniel J. Pipes