A new message was received from Citizen Warrior Friday. Unfortunately, I am not in complete agreement with the opinions he expressed. Since his article is long and detailed, I will insert subscripts, linking them to my comments which appear in a list below the horizontal line at the end of Citizen Warrior's message.
Posted: 13 Mar 2009 11:30 AM PDT
HERE IS another addition to our series, Answers to Objections. This objection is not usually spoken out loud, but it's a central fear lurking behind much of the resistance you get when you talk about Islam.
When you're talking to people, you want them to accept the simple fact that Islamic teachings are very straightforward, and they call for intolerance and violence toward non-Muslims and an unrelenting effort to make us all submit to Shari'a law.
They will put up every objection they can think of because they don't want to accept this premise.
If they articulated their fear, it would sound something like this: "For God's sake, that CAN'T be true, because it would mean we would have to go to war with 1.3 billion Muslims, and we can't do that!" Some people actually say it out loud.
Like many of the objections, this one is a great opportunity to insert a little more information into a brain that is likely almost entirely empty of any facts about Islam. Here are some possible responses you can give:
1. Luckily, we don't have to go to war with all of them. Most of the people who are now Muslims never chose to be so. Their ancestors were almost all forced to be Muslims. The whole country was conquered and Shari'a law was imposed. Shari'a puts pressure on everyone to be Muslim, and not just in name only. It is against the law to skip the five prayers a day or skip fasting during Ramadan or skip paying zakat (alms to the mosque). In other words, the practice of Islam is enforced by law, so after a few generations, it would be hard to think outside of being a Muslim, especially when the penalty for leaving the faith is death.
But what this means is that many of them would choose to live their lives without the constant domination of Islam if they had the option. So even if it came to war, we wouldn't have to go to war with 1.3 billion. 1
2. What would you go to war to do? I mean, why would you think a war would be necessary?
3. We don't need to go to war, we only need to change some of our own laws and some of our own foreign policies. And sometimes we wouldn't even have to change them, we would only need to start enforcing them. For example, it is against the law to try to overthrow the government or to even plot to do so. It is sedition. It's already against the law. And yet in three-fourths of the mosques in the U.S., jihad is being preached.
Jihad means "the struggle to make everyone on earth submit to Shari'a law." It is an essential element of Islam. It is a core tenet. This isn't some fringe teaching that nobody cares about. This is a central purpose of Islam. If we want the Muslims in our country to stop working to undermine and overthrow the government, we will have to make a distinction between the political aspects of Islam and the religious aspects of Islam, and we'll have to stop people from committing sedition. We do not need to go to war. We only need to educate enough non-Muslims so that no more politicians ignorant of Islam are voted into office. The one thing that needs to happen is education.2
4. The problem is not with Muslims, so we don't have to go to war with them. The problem is not even with Islamic doctrine. Our problem is the abject ignorance of the majority of non-Muslims. Because of this ignorance, the West is conceding its freedoms. Let me give you an illustration to clarify what I mean:3
On the comments on an article about sociopaths, most of the commenters are victims of sociopaths, and they tell their stories about what happened to them — they were conned out of their life savings or they were married to someone who abused their children or one of their parents deliberately drives them crazy, etc. But two of the people who comment are themselves sociopaths, and their comments illuminate an important principle.
The point of view of most of the victims is that they don't understand how sociopaths can be so mean or cruel or heartless. The point of view of the sociopaths is that they don't understand how normal people can be so naive as to trust everyone, so foolish as to never protect themselves from someone who has already proven to be dangerous, or so stupid as to sign over the deed to their house!
Same with non-Muslims dealing with Islam. Okay, so it is a Muslim's duty to strive for the political goal of establishing Shari'a law throughout the world by any means necessary. That's what they do. But we don't have to allow it! They are only making progress toward their goal because we let them. We trust them. We make treaties with them. We allow them to immigrate. We make assumptions about them (like they must be just like us, their religion must be similar to other religions we know of, etc.). We are conceding our freedoms. We are forgoing our own self-preservation. We are voluntarily giving away our ability to defend ourselves.4
The problem is not with them, it's with us. We don't need to go to war. We need to stop being stupid, and that can't happen until more people know about Islam.5
Most of the people commenting on that sociopath site said they were surprised to find out there was even such a thing as a sociopath. The phenomenon of "everyday sociopaths" is not very well known. People know about psychopathic serial killers, but most people don't know there is such a thing as people walking around in ordinary lives who have no empathy for others and cannot develop it, people whose only goal in life is to win and dominate, people who feel no pity or remorse and who have no emotional conflict when they are cruel.
Some people who tell their sad tales were married to a sociopath for years without ever realizing such a person could exist, so they were totally frustrated, anguished, and confused by their spouse's behavior, and of course, in their ignorance they made one stupid, self-defeating mistake after another.
The free world is doing the same thing with Islam's relentless, self-serving aggression — making one stupid, self-defeating mistake after another (read more about that here). The stupidity must stop. The only thing missing is enough people who have at least a passing familiarity with basic Islamic teachings.
Okay, that's four possible answers to the objection, "But we can't go to war with a billion Muslims!"
I would appreciate it (and so would future readers) if you could come up with an even better answer than these, and post it in the comments to this article. We can pool our resources, pool our intelligence, and help each other do the one thing that must be done: Educate our fellow non-Muslims.6
- Islam is at war against us. Either we defend ourselves or we will be conquered; enslaved or killed. It is true that Muslims are the first victims of Islam. It is true that many of them would prefer some other choice. But, when we retaliate against Islamic attack, they are all involved, they unite in spite of national, tribal and sectarian differences and they fight. The old saying: "Me against my brother, my brother and I against our cousin, us against a stranger..." is still valid. We need to induce mass apostasy and send the recalcitrant remnant to collect their Houris.
- Did changing domestic legislation win World Wars 1 & 2? Could we have won them without sending millions of men and dollars? Yeah, right. Little will be accomplished without educating our fellow citizens and applying great pressure to the politicians, but the war will not be won that way. Yes, we need to amend the Constitution, close the Mosques & Madrassas and send the Muslims home, but those measures alone won't win the war, they are only the home front battle.
- The problem is human avarice & pride. Moe invented Islam as a source of wealth, income and fresh sex slaves. Warfare is central to Islam because Moe lived off the booty. He told his companions that their eternal destiny depended on going to war with him. Fight and collect spoils if you win or go to Paradise if you get killed; go to Hell if you don't go to war. If you believe, you join the Jihad.
- This paragraph is true. Western Civilization is making those suicidal errors, but correcting those errors, while necessary, is not sufficient to win the war.
- Would the Assyrians, Armenians or Hindus have been saved by knowledge? Neither will we. Widespread understanding of Islam is a necessity, but not a panacea. There is a physical war on, and blood is being shed. Bombs, bullets and knives kill; computer keyboards do not.
- This conflict has several components.
Most people will not absorb, comprehend & believe the truth about Islam just because we tell them. They will not stand still to listen nor will they sit still to read. The facts do not comport with their prejudices & expectations. They will seek loopholes and exceptions. They have been instructed by authority figures whom they trust. They have been told, and they believe, that Islam is a great religion of peace. When we submit evidence that Islam is a war cult, they will not accept it because it does not fit the template of their prejudice.
Islamic scripture, tradition, jurisprudence & history form a congruent pattern which should be sufficient to convince any intelligent and open minded person.
The most egregious ayat, ahadith & fiqh have been compiled into an ebook, which takes up nearly 7MB on my hard disk. I use it nearly every day in researching blog posts. It is EgregiousAyat.chm. Are you willing to invest the time required to download and read it; to begin using quotes from it in your blog posts, emails and letters?
Most of the visits to my blog posts are brief: 0 seconds. It is not easy to captivate the reader's attention and interest them in the gritty details. Slap them in the face with final conclusions and they wipe the facts away with a laugh. Bury them in detail and they are bored to tears. Read this blog post for one example: Fat Jack's Erratic Rants: SOMEONE LISTENS TO RUSH LIMBAUGH TOO MUCH, and follow through to the original article and the reader's comments.