Killing two fallacies with one poll

From Power Line:

Thomas asks Secretary Rice what evidence she has that the denizens of such an independent state would give up the dream that actually seems to drive them -- the dream of eliminating Israel:

SECRETARY RICE: Well, you can look at any opinion poll in the Palestinian territories and 70 percent of the people will say they're perfectly ready to live side by side with Israel because they just want to live in peace. And when it comes right down to it, yeah, there are plenty of extremists in the Palestinian territories who are not going to be easily dealt with. They have to be dealt with — Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in the Palestinian territories — they're terrorists and they have to be dealt with as terrorists.

But the great majority of Palestinian people — this is — I've been with these people. The great majority of people, they just want a better life. This is an educated population. I mean, they have a kind of culture of education and a culture of civil society. I just don't believe mothers want their children to grow up to be suicide bombers. I think the mothers want their children to grow up to go to university. And if you can create the right conditions, that's what people are going to do.

QUESTION: Do you think this or do you know this?

SECRETARY RICE: Well, I think I know it.

QUESTION: You think you know it?

SECRETARY RICE: I think I know it.

I'd like to see the poll to which Secretary Rice is referring. I don't recall one with results as described. But what are we to make of the broader issue? I read Secretary Rice's responses as suggesting that she knows, or thinks she knows, she's peddling tripe.

That poll would be their last election, in which the "Palestianians" voted for a terrorist group sworn to Israel's destruction.

This fact kills two falsehoods: First, that "Palestinians" are a noble people desiring freedom and peaceful coexistence with Israel, and second, that democracy will benefit the Infidel when instituted among a people enslaved by Islam.

Christian Liberty versus the tyranny of Allah

"A culture that gave the world the novel; the music of Mozart, Beethoven, and Schubert; and the paintings of Michelangelo, da Vinci, and Rembrandt does not need lessons from societies whose idea of heaven, peopled with female virgins, resembles a cosmic brothel. Nor does the West need lectures on the superior virtue of societies in which women are kept in subjection under sharia, endure genital mutilation, are stoned to death for alleged adultery, and are married off against their will at the age of nine . . . ." -Ibn Warraq

Some cultures are better than others.

A variation on a decidedly tragic historical theme

Sticks and stones may break my bones,

but sometimes words are a very clear indicator of what is to come.

A little historical irony

The more things change, the more they stay the same.
It's time for another Crusade.

The undeniable, inexplicable, and stubborn ignorance of Hugh Hewitt

On matters of traditional national politics, there are few commentators as knowledgeable or perceptive as Hugh Hewitt.

On the subject of Islam and the threat it poses to free people everywhere, there are few more (undoubtedly innocently) obtuse.

The Moderate Muslim

There are Apostate Muslims, but Islam itself is not moderate. That's a variation of the insightful and succinct, "There are moderate Muslims, but Islam itself is not moderate."

Besides the untenable "Islamism has nothing to do with Islam," Hugh persists in attempting to (mis-) define the Religion of Peace in terms of those Muslims who (allegedly) reject forever offensive warfare against the Infidel and Apostate to make the world Islam.

"Alleged," for how can one have Islam without Allah and his Qur'an? Without Mohammed words and deeds? A true Muslim must obey Allah and his apostle who command the fighting against, subduing and humiliating, and killing of non-Muslims.

Establishing the Facts

Following are questions to which Hugh has never provided me the answers. These are questions he must avoid answering, for--as he delights in demonstrating with hostile callers to his radio program--establishing basic facts lead inextricably to certain conclusions. To avoid admitting these truths Hugh seems willing to sacrifice any amount of his intellectual integrity and moral courage:

1. Is Qur'an the perfect word of Allah?

2. Are all Allah's commands (that he has not abrogated) in Qur'an to be obeyed by faithful Muslims?

3. Are the words and example of Mohammed (Sira and Hadith) to be emulated by faithful Muslims (as their resources and circumstances allow)?

4. Does Allah command the faithful Muslim to "...kill the unbelievers wherever you find them"?

Does Allah require the faithful Muslim to "Fight...until all religion is for Allah"?

Did Allah command faithful Muslims to "Fight...the People of the Book until they feel themselves subdued and pay the jizya"?

5. Did Mohammed state that he had been ordered to "fight until all confess there is no god but Allah and Mohammed is his prophet"?

6. Did Mohammed say that no work is like Jihad?

7. Did Mohammed say that he had "been made victorious with terror"?

8. Did Mohammed say, "If anyone changes his religion, then kill him"?

9. Did Mohammed indulge his "marital impulse" with a nine-year-old child (marrying her when she was six and he in his fifties)?

Did he not attribute his raping this child (his favorite wife) to Allah by saying, "If this is from Allah, then it must happen"?

10. Have Muslims warred against humanity to make the world Islam (again, as their resources and will have allowed) for nearly fourteen centuries?

The answer to all these questions is, regrettably and tragically, "yes." These are unalterable facts of history, despite what deceitful apologists and gullible, ignorant infidels and apostates might say to the contrary.

Denying that the violence of Qur'an, Sira, and Hadith inspire and sustain jihad is like denying Hitler's ideology motivated the Holocaust. It is absurd.

That "Tiny Minority of Extremists"

You keep using that word ("tiny"). I do not think it means what you think it means.

How blind (or craven) must one be at this stage of the West's submission to Islam's bloody intimidation not only to deny still the commands of Allah and his false prophet for offensive warfare against the Infidel, but to persist in the absurdity that the jihad ideology receives support from only a "tiny minority of extremists"?

It is becoming increasingly difficult to avoid noticing that wherever Muslims protest in any significant (or insignificant) numbers, they do not protest against the "hijackers" of their religion, nor do they protest in favor of Liberty or human rights. Rather, they protest in favor of beheading, burning, and burying anyone who dares to point out Allah and his prophet from Hell's delight in evil, even when that involves merely citing their own "sacred" texts.

Recent opinion polls in the UK show growing support among Muslims for violence against their hosts (some even carry it out!). All over Europe, "youths" burn and break (and worse) Infidel personal property (and persons). In Pakistan, not only do you have nearly total (90%) lust for Infidel and Apostate blood, but you've got the government's intelligence agency aiding the jihadists! Indonesia's population is admitting more openly its support for holy war. One election after another within Dar al-Islam brings to its "perverters" of the "great world religion" ever-increasing political power. What of the Philippines? Somalia? Nigeria? Sudan?

Even if only one percent of the world's Muslims would actually engage in jihad (one percent of 1.2 billion is 12 million!), a majority of the ummah still support it financially, logistically, emotionally, and spiritually. And nearly all support the subjugation of the Infidel under Shari'ah.

They must, because their god and prophet require it.

In Conclusion

The challenge facing the West is not in strength of arms, but in strength of will and clarity of mind. If we lack the will or ability to admit against what we fight--the god that commands, "...kill the unbelievers wherever you find them"--how can we possibly deal effectively with its ideology of hate and the threat posed by its adherents?

The West commits suicide, and Islam is glad to lend a hand

What the "peaceful, moderate" Muslim practices is not Islam, for who has the ultimate authority to define that religion but its god and founder? What decent person can discover the command of Allah and the words and deeds of Mohammed and still profess such a faith? When will ignorant, cowardly Western dhimmis discover their brain, heart, and courage and expose the lie?

PowerLine notes The Claremont Institute's interesting and insightful review of several books on our civilization's current state of decay in Suicide of the West:

...There is a crisis of meaning and purpose in Western European societies...They are almost entirely post-religious, but they have found no form of transcendence to replace religion, and none is on the horizon. An awareness of belonging, or of contributing to, a collectivity or endeavor of world-importance is no longer possible for them (the European Union is the creation of bureaucrats, by bureaucrats, for bureaucrats). Modern Europeans believe in very little, except in as comfortable and safe a life as possible.

Islam is on the horizon. Actually, its next door and down the street and in Parliament. It's dating your sister.

Such emphasis on pleasure is described by Scripture as characteristic of the godless ("their god is their stomach"). Those who have enjoyed so much affluence for so long (this includes us in America) must realize that comfort and pleasure are not our reason for being. Faith in Christ expressing itself in love is that to which the Creator of Man calls us.

That faith once made Europe great; its widespread rejection is tragic, not only because of its eternal consequences and the loss of past temporal glory, but because of the wholesale doom to come at the hands of Allah.

Indeed, health and safety have altogether replaced faith, hope, and charity as the cardinal desiderata. It is scarcely any wonder that, when faced by people who, quite mistakenly and with a combination of staggering ignorance and arrogance, believe themselves to be in possession of a truth that justifies almost any atrocity committed, if not by them, exactly, then by those whom they have indoctrinated, modern Western Europeans do not know how to react. They have either forgotten what it is to believe in anything, to such an extent that they cannot really believe that anyone else believes in anything, either; or their memories of belief are of belief in something so horrible—Communism, for example, or Nazism—that they no longer believe that they have the right to pass judgment on anything. This is not a strong position from which to fight people who, by their own admission, hate you and are bent upon your destruction, brought about preferably at your own expense. First, you can't take them seriously; second, you suspect they might in any case be right. European multiculturalism is self-hatred writ large..."

Not "almost" any atrocity. Any atrocity. When warring against the Infidel and Apostate, nothing is too evil or inhuman for the hordes of Allah. (Just ask Manuel Palaeologus. Ask the innocent and helpless men, women (including nuns), and children violated and slaughtered during the desecration of the Hagia Sofia and the fall of Constantinople.)

As for multiculturalism, respect for others is commanded by Christ; so is doing good toward, praying for, and loving our enemies. This does not mean that we are required (or even allowed) to aid evil by rejecting truth and exalting a lie.

Following are some disturbing words about Tony Blair. Considering his cooperation in establishing Shari'ah in the UK, how should President Bush's constant, inexplicable apologies for Islam be understood?

To their credit, President Bush and Prime Minister Blair have sent our militaries to destroy those actually carrying out jihad; regrettably, they have done nothing to address the widespread support for Allah's War Against Humanity among the world's Large Majority of Moderates, or the ideology that inspires it.

(It is impossible to win the hearts and minds of those whose god commands your conversion, submission, or death, who are taught that they are entitled to your wealth and person, the denial of which is an insult to their entire being, their entire worldview.)

In fact, when the situation (and our survival) call(s) for our leaders to tell the plain, obvious truth about Islam and its murderous ideology, they twist themselves and their listeners into all sorts of intellectual and semantic contortions. They have been courageous; they need the last bit of courage to admit publicly (and often) what Allah, Mohammed, and everyone else familiar with Islam's authoritative texts and history know: the source and sustenance of Islamic terrorism are the command of its god and the example of its false prophet.

Phillips draws our attention to the paradoxical nature of Britain's Prime Minister, who appears so resolute in foreign, and so utterly spineless in domestic, policy. While he is not in any straightforward way an opportunist, and genuinely if delusively believes himself to be a man of principle, the fact is that going to war with Mr. Bush was the only means by which he could achieve personal world importance. Given America's overwhelming military might, he did not risk military defeat; but he was vulnerable at home because several vital parliamentary seats, traditionally Labour-voting, were strongly Muslim. And therefore he did not scruple to allow his party to make use of scarcely concealed anti-Semitic images during an election in which his chief opponent was Jewish; permitted his wife to appear in court to defend the supposed right of Muslim schoolchildren to go to school completely covered, in the full knowledge of what this really meant; and corruptly permitted the extension of postal voting to Muslim constituencies, thereby in effect disenfranchising Muslim women. Phillips makes clear the many ways in which Mr. Blair's government has been complicit with Islamism, and I doubt she will be receiving many invitations to Downing Street as a reward for her efforts.

"Islamism." I recently heard a very popular, self-described "center-right," "evangelical" commentator actually use the term "Islamist-fascism." Both terms are redundant and used to make a false distinction between faithful Muslims who kill for Allah and faithful Muslims who haven't killed for Allah...yet but still support fighting against, subduing and humiliating, and killing Infidel and Apostate to make the world Islam.

"-ism " is defined variously as:

-a distinctive doctrine, system, or theory;

-a belief (or system of beliefs) accepted as authoritative by some group or school;

-a doctrine, philosophy, or school of thought;

-a theory developed by an individual (e.g. Mohammedanism);

-a political movement (e.g. Shari'ah and the caliphate);

-a process or practice (e.g. terrorism);

-a prejudice or bias (e.g. dhimmitude); and

-a religion.

What is Islam if none of the above? Obviously, the suffix is completely unnecessary, the adding of which is intended to convey (falsely) a distinction between Islam and the ideology of the jihadists.

As for "Islamist fascism," Muslims historically have fought to establish its reign over all humanity. Qur'an and Sunnah clearly show this to be the will of Allah and his apostle:

"...fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them..." (Qur’an 9:5),

"Fight...the People of the Book [Jews and Christians], until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued" (Qur'an 9:29),

"...fight them on until...there prevail...faith in Allah altogether and everywhere..." (Qur'an 8:38, 39),

"...fight the unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you..." (Qur'an 9:123),

"Fighting is prescribed for you..." (Qur'an 2:216), and,

"Allah's Apostle said: 'I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle...'" (Bukhari Volume 1, Book 2, Number 24).

When will our leadership admit these facts? How long will the West tolerate the Religion of Death's intimidation and murder within its own borders?

Aid Christians suffering under Islam, not their oppressors

President Bush's Iraq strategy will succeed only to the degree that the religion of Mahomet is rejected by its people. Unfortunately, it appears we are squandering the brightest, best, and bravest of our citizens on a people whose god makes them not only unable--but violently unwilling--to appreciate their sacrifice.

Instead of creating a free Iraq that will inspire non-observant Muslims in other Islamic countries to fight for their own Liberty, we are supplying American blood and treasure to expand Shari'ah. Rather than enable a greater Iran, we ought to be aiding fellow Christians and other non-Muslims suffering under the tyranny of Allah.

More on the tolerance of Islam from International Christian Concern:

ANCIENT COMMUNITIES PERSECUTED

Iraq's Christians at risk of annihilation

By CHARLES TANNOCK

(Japan Times) -- The world is consumed by fears that Iraq is degenerating into a civil war between Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds. But in this looming war of all against all, it is Iraq's small community of Assyrian Christians that is at risk of annihilation.

Iraq's Christian communities are among the world's most ancient, practicing their faith in Mesopotamia almost since the time of Jesus Christ. The Assyrian Apostolic Church, for instance, traces its foundation back to 34 A.D. and St. Peter. Likewise, the Assyrian Church of the East dates to 33 A.D. and St. Thomas. The Aramaic that many of Iraq's Christians still speak is the language of those apostles -- and of Christ.

When tolerated by their Muslim rulers, Assyrian Christians contributed much to the societies in which they lived. Their scholars helped usher in the "Golden Age" of the Arab world by translating important works into Arabic from Greek and Syriac. But in recent times, toleration has scarcely existed.

In the Armenian Genocide of 1914-1918, 750,000 Assyrians -- roughly two-thirds of their number at the time -- were massacred by the Ottoman Turks with the help of the Kurds.

Under the Iraqi Hashemite monarchy, the Assyrians faced persecution for co-operating with the British during World War I. Many fled to the West, among them the Church's patriarch. During former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's wars with the Kurds, hundreds of Assyrian villages were destroyed, their inhabitants rendered homeless, and dozens of ancient churches were bombed. The teaching of the Syriac language was prohibited and Assyrians were forced to give their children Arabic names in an effort to undermine their Christian identity. Those who wished to hold government jobs had to declare Arab ethnicity.

In 1987, the Iraqi census listed 1.4 million Christians. Today, only about 600,000 to 800,000 remain in the country, most on the Nineveh plain.

As many as 60,000, and perhaps even more, have fled since the beginning of the insurgency that followed the U.S.-led invasion in 2003. Their exodus accelerated in August 2004, after the start of the terrorist bombing campaign against Christian churches by Islamists who accuse them of collaboration with the allies by virtue of their faith.

A recent U.N. report states that religious minorities in Iraq "have become the regular victims of discrimination, harassment, and, at times, persecution, with incidents ranging from intimidation to murder," and that "members of the Christian minority appear to be particularly targeted."

Indeed, there are widespread reports of Christians fleeing the country as a result of threats being made to their women for not adhering to strict Islamic dress codes. Christian women are said to have had acid thrown in their faces. Some have been killed for wearing jeans or not wearing the veil.

This type of violence is particularly acute in the area around Mosul. High-ranking clergy there claim that priests in Iraq can no longer wear their clerical robes in public for fear of being attacked by Islamists. Last January, coordinated car-bomb attacks were carried out on six churches in Baghdad and Kirkuk; on another occasion, six churches were simultaneously bombed in Baghdad and Mosul. Over the past two years, 27 Assyrian churches have reportedly been attacked for the sole reason that they were Christian places of worship.

These attacks go beyond targeting physical manifestations of the faith. Christian-owned small businesses, particularly those selling alcohol, have been attacked, and many shopkeepers murdered. The director of the Iraqi Museum, Donny George, a respected Assyrian, says that he was forced to flee Iraq to Syria in fear of his life, and that Islamic fundamentalists obstructed all of his work that was not focused on Islamic artifacts.

Assyrian leaders also complain of deliberate discrimination in the January 2005 elections. In some cases, they claim, ballot boxes did not arrive in Assyrian towns and villages, voting officials failed to show up, or ballot boxes were stolen. They also cite the intimidating presence of Kurdish militia and secret police near polling stations. Recently, however, there are signs the Iraqi Kurdish authorities are being more protective of their Christian communities.

Sadly, the plight of Iraq's Christians is not an isolated one in the Middle East. In Iran, the population as a whole has nearly doubled since the 1979 revolution; but, under a hostile regime, the number of Christians in the country has fallen from roughly 300,000 to 100,000. In 1948, Christians accounted for roughly 20 percent of the population of what was then Palestine; since then, their numbers have roughly halved. In Egypt, emigration among Coptic Christians is disproportionately high; many convert to Islam under pressure, and over the past few years violence perpetrated against the Christian community has taken many lives.

The persecution of these ancient and unique Christian communities, in Iraq and in the Middle East as a whole, is deeply disturbing. Last April, the European Parliament voted virtually unanimously for the Assyrians to be allowed to establish (on the basis of section 5 of the Iraqi Constitution) a federal region where they can be free from outside interference to practice their own way of life. It is high time now that the West paid more attention, and took forceful action to secure the future of Iraq's embattled Christians.