An Alternate Solution to the "Islam Problem"

From time to time, we hear various solutions to the "Muslim problem." Islam is so profoundly anti-life, anti-human,
anti-knowledge, anti-reason, anti-progress, anti-reality, anti-, anti-, anti- EVERYTHING, that it has become a serious pest. All the rest of us in the infidel world are beginning to tire of always having to turn around to clean up after some mess some Muslim or other has made.

They make the messes, and yet they blame all of us infidels for them. They have the emotional maturity of two-year-olds; they do not play well with others, they're in a constant state of pique--which they discharge by throwing temper tantrums--they seek immediate gratification, they want what they want and they want it NOW, all their problems are ALWAYS the fault of others, they NEVER consider taking any responsibility for themselves, they have no insight, they are professional victims who blame everyone else in the world for their hideous way of life, their unhappiness, their frustration and their hostility--all because they have a total disregard and antipathy for the requirements that reality places on them. Reality is, for them, the enemy; they don't understand anything about it; when it comes to reality, they are slow learners who just can't grasp the fact that reality always wins in the end, and that it won't change to accommodate them and their whims, wishes, and desires.

We infidels are a tolerant lot; even under the malignant influence of the Postmodernists, though, our patience is finite, and one day, we will have to solve the "Islam Problem." We cannot, and will not, indefinitely put up with their attacks, whether they involve murder and mayhem or da'wa, on our way of life.

We're willing to give them time to grow up, and we even supply a role model for a happier way of relating to reality. Many individual Muslims throughout history have observed infidels, and consciously or subconsciously, some have seen that there is something more satisfying beyond the restrictions of Islam.

Among those who understand that Islam is, indeed, a problem for all the rest of us, numerous suggestions for a solution have been offered.

One so-called "solution" is to cave, to give in; that's the Postmodernist-Leftist-Liberal "solution." Europe, Canada,
Central and South America, Africa, and parts of Asia have already made the decision to become dhimmis, but we, and with any
luck, Australia, will not go that route. So caving is out--at least for a few of us.

A second "solution" is to destroy their three holiest sites: the Kaaba in Mecca (the meteorite that they believe was built under the supervision of Adam to resemble the heavenly house of Allah), the Mosque of the Prophet Mohammed in Medina (the burial site of Mohammed and his family), and the Dome Mosque in Jerusalem (for an explanation of the nature and importance of both the initial "vision" of Mohammed, and his "night voyage" to Jerusalem, please see http://www.6thcolumnagainstjihad.com/CUBED_P6htm).

Victor Mordecai, the pen-name of a respected authority on Islamic terrorism, says that if these sites were destroyed, it would prove to Allah's followers that he was not "the greatest" after all, and that they would feel the need to find themselves a "strong" God--maybe even the Christian God--and that the effort to make a world wide caliphate would then fizzle.

If all else fails, and Islam doesn't change its moral code to one that no longer maintains as its "standard of the good" the conversion of the entire world into an Islamic planet, the destruction of these sites certainly remains a viable option, as does a much wider path of destruction throughout the Islamic world. If it comes down to an "us vs. them," situation, we're on our side, and while we do not presently have the political will to carry out this version of a solution, we certainly have the capability.

There actually is a third solution, but while it would be an uphill climb for those few Muslims who really want to "give peace a chance," and lead productive, happy lives, it is a solution taken from their own history and would not require them to leave Islam. Doubtless, it would be considered heretical in the worst way by the current crop of mullahs and ayatollahs, and by many of their ordinary Muslim neighbors and family members, but it does offer a potential solution.

That having been said, once upon a time, after Mohammed died and before al-Ghazali, the "father of Islamic fundamentalism" won the battle to mold Islam into the shape we see today, there was actually a group that didn't feel threatened by the beliefs of other religions, that understood that human beings had free will, that considered debate to be a good thing, that realized that innovation wasn't a sin, that believed that questions needed to be raised and answered, that considered much of the content of the Koran to be allegorical, that realized that knowledge was beneficial to humankind--well, you know; it was definitely not the version of Islam that we have all come to know and hold in so much contempt today.

These guys were a sort of a philosophical "flash in the Islamic pan" called "Mu'tazilites."

The Mu'tazilites were "rationalists," who believed that truth could be discovered with the use of reason; they were very active in the scholarship that exixted during that window of opportunity between the death of Mohammed and the meeting of religious authorities a couple of hundred years later, when it was decided at an Islamic version of the "Conference of Nicea" what Islam was to "look like" from then on.

During that brief period, even some Muslims were free to think, to question, to debate, to discover--all the good stuff that later became known as the "Golden Age."

Greek philosophy, upon which this sort of thinking was based, had spread with Alexander the Great throughout the still pagan world, and that included the Arabs. It was the Greek way of thinking, especially Aristotelian thinking, that led to all the great centers of learning where scholarship thrived--Alexandria, Byzantium, Pergamum, Damascus, etc.

The reason the Mu'tazilites were able to take such great advantage of Greek philosophy without undue interference, even though they were Muslims, was because Islam hadn't yet become crystalized into the form we see today. There were many varieties of Islam, among them these Mu'tazilites, who, because 1) of their own non-fundamentalist views (as described above); 2) of the relative disregard that the first dynasty of caliphs, the Umayyads (661-750), had for the Koran (one of them is even said to have stuck a Koran with a lance and shot it to pieces with arrows); and 3) of the fact that the attraction of Islam for the Bedouins was not for its spritual qualities, but for an opportunity to participate in wars leading to booty and wealth (some estimates of the number of true, believing converts to Islam at the time of Muhammed's death were fewer than one thousand).

The Mu'tazilites, who were against the establishment of a theocratic state, were seriously opposed by many fundamentalist groups who wanted one. The fundamentalists prohibited debate, said that question about Islam were not permitted, that innovation was a sin, that the Koran had been revealed from Allah and contained all the knowledge that was worth knowing and was the literal word of Allah. Scientific discoveries of the sort being spread about by the Mu'tazilite scholars and their ilk seriously contradicted much of what was contained in the Koran, so science, among other things, was a "no-no."

The Mu'tazilites could have gone on and continued to influence Islam, but they shot themselves in the foot. For all their "rationalism," despite certain bits of very advanced thinking, they had some very serious flaws. The most important was that they had not yet developed any concept of "rights," a problem that enabled them to behave in a self-destructive manner later on.

When the "godless" first dynasty of caliphs was overthrown, the second dynasty, the Abbasids, took their place. These latter were convinced that the Mu'tazilites' relative indifference to religion--Islam in particular--was a form of opposition to religion. Certainly, the Mu'tazilites' open opposition to a theocratic state was a problem for the Abbasids, who wanted to establish one. All the authority would come from Allah, but (of course) they, the Abbasids, would be his only legitimate representatives, and thus the only ones who could communicate his will.

There were many significant points of disagreement between the Mu'tazilites and the new, more fundamentalist-inclined dynasty, and the Mu'tazilites weren't well treated because of that. One of the most contentious differences was whether the Koran was eternal, something that had been in existence for all time, and merely revealed to Mohammed at the moment of his "vision" (for an explanation of just what this was, along with the famous "night voyage to Jerusalem" that is causing so much trouble between the Palestinians and the Israelis today, please see: http://www.6thcolumnagainstjihad.com/CUBED_P6htm), or whether it had been created de novo at the moment of the "vision." The Mu'tazilites believed that it was created de novo, and not that it was eternal.

The Abbasids treated the Mu'tazilites poorly, but nevertheless, one of the Abbasid Caliphs took their side on the
particular issue of the eternal vs. the finite existence of the Koran. He began a campaign to force all government
officials, and many others, to state that this was their belief. To encourage them to do so, al-Ma'mun, the Caliph in question, took to imprisoning, torturing and executing people until and unless they confessed this belief. The whole thing turned into a sort of Muslim predecessor of the Spanish Inquisition. This process of imprisonment, torture, and execution continued throughout the reigns of three caliphs.

The Mu'tazilites jumped right on this bandwagon; their own intolerance of superstition, mythology, literalism, etc. was extreme, and so they were pleased with this movement in support of their own view, even if it was only of one part of their belief. When the persecution of "eternalists" ended, it was under the reign of a caliph who was himself very intolerant of the entire Mu'tazilite position, and the tables were turned; the Mu'tazilites now became the persecuted.

That was how the Mu'tazilites shot themselves in the foot, and quite possibly contributed to the failure of Islam to
develop along a more reasonable line. Had they merely held firm, and gathered about them more and more followers who believed as they did, and not climbed aboard the persecutorial wagon, it is entirely possible that Islam might have evolved differently. Even the Asharites, followers of the fundamentalist al-Ashari, who were among the more traditional groups opposing the Mu'tazilites (and who were considered to be the ones who were responsible for their final defeat), left a teensy bit of room for a less literalist way of thinking, in that they believed that knowledge that depended solely on the most traditional sources was not always entirely reliable, and that it sometimes needed to be confirmed by reason.

It was the strict fundamentalists, though, who in the end, won the battle for control over the direction that Islam was to take, and it was they who were responsible for what Islam is today.

The bottom line, and the reason for giving this mini-history of early Islam here, is that Islam actually included a way of thinking that, had it survived, had the potential of becoming something that could have become something very different from the hard-core anti-life, anti-knowledge, anti-human nature entity that we see today, and which makes of its followers the miserable, non-productive, frustrated, hostile, humans they are today, who have been taught that all the very things that characterize human beings are morally corrupt.

If those Muslims who have succeeded in "compartmentalizing" their beliefs--that is, who accept the more reasonable aspects of Islam, and reject those aspects that make it impossible for them to work productively with non-Muslims--the problems of both Muslims and non-Muslims would be significantly reduced, and Muslims could be a happier people. Nobody ever accuses them of being dumb, it's just that their substantial intellects are held prisoner by a viciously anti-life system that causes them to lose out on patents, non-politicalized Nobel Prizes, accomplishments equal to those of any of the infidel world--oh, it is a very sad thing.

It is the Mu'tazilite tradition that gives Muslims a stepping stone, from within the history of Islam itself, to a form of their religion that could accomplish this. If that could be done, thinking about other "solutions" could be abandoned. Islam could keep its stories, its scriptures, its festive practices, its rituals, and still not put its very existence at risk.

They just have to adopt a form of their religion--and the Mu'tazilites had sown the seeds of such a form--that permits them to have a moral code that does not insist that its "standard of the good" be the imposition of Islam on everybody else.

This shift in emphasis requires the kind of respect for reason that the Mu'tazilites had just begun to have, and that the West later adopted and refined.

Good luck, all you Muslims. There is still time.

~~~~~

An Open Letter to All Muslims

VIEWER POLL (2005)

 

How should the U.S. government deal with Muslim extremists?

1) Meet with extremist groups to try to address their complaints  2%

2) Jail or kill as many as possible  92%

3) Neither of the above  6%

CNSNews.com

To Our Muslim Friends:

This CNSNews poll is a clear message to Muslims in our country and around the world.

In light of the above poll, my suggestion to the entire Islamic community is this: Muslims must discard all aspects of their religion that insist that it is their moral obligation to force the non-Islamic parts of the world to choose among the following: Convert to Islam, be killed, or become dhimmis.

If the murder and mayhem continue, and if Muslims do not very publically, widely, loudly, and SINCERELY (forget the taqiyya and kitman, my Muslim friends) stand up and actively oppose those who engage in these practices, people all around the world will become weary and run out of patience.

As you can see from the poll, you can't rely on the PC media or the PC politicians or the PC celebrities for information about how the American public regards Muslim "extremists."

Now you and I, my Muslim friends--along with many others--understand full well that the kind of behavior the so-called "extremists" engage in is actually an integral part of your religion, and that it is, in fact, your religious obligation to 1) engage in it, or at the very least, 2) support it.

We all know that there are some--not many, but some--among you who would prefer to live in peace among your Infidel neighbors. For this, you are considered heretics, and since heresy is frowned upon, up to and including qualifying you for the death penalty, you remain silent.

Look at those poll figures; I did not make them up. While they are from a selected part of the American population, they nevertheless represent a growing number of people who are getting fed up. Listen to the growing numbers of callers to radio talk shows who are angry at Muslims; consider the level of frustration Americans are experiencing at those of our politicians who refuse to take common-sense measures such as defending our ports and borders, and profiling Muslims. Watch the growing support for politicians like Tom Tancredo, who dare to confront the PC forces to warn people of what Islam is really up to.

It is said that up to 70% of Muslims support what their more activist colleagues are doing when they blow up 3000 people, saw the heads off of captive workers, bomb school buses and subways, and on, and on, and on.

As for the 30% of you who do not, you risk getting caught up in whatever happens to your hostile fellows if their
irrational behaviors do not stop soon. There are those, including myself, who greatly fear that bitterness and anger will sweep up those among you who "compartmentalize" your religion, living only by its more reasonable parts, and rejecting those parts which doom Muslims to unremitting conflict, generation after generation, with the rest of the world.

Do not be discouraged that only 25%-30% of you wish to co-exist with non-Muslims. After all, only 30% of American Colonists supported the idea of political separation from Britain. The war was hard fought, and we paid dearly for it, but look at us now!

Do I believe you must discard Islam? No; groups exist today, as we speak, that have "spun off" from the kind of Islam that the rest of the world is growing weary of. If you know your own history, then you know that the Koran, the Hadith, and the Sirat Rasul Allah have not always been the literal "marching orders" that they became when Al-Ghazali finally established fundamentalism as the one and only version of Islam.

I strongly suggest that if you wish to survive at all as a religion, that you re-examine and reconsider adopting the views of your Mu'tazilite predecessors, the writings of Ibn Rushd, the philosophy of scholars such as Ali Sina, and all of those sects today that would prefer a peaceful, productive, happy life.

There is no way on God's green earth that Islam, as practiced today, will be permitted by the rest of the world to continue on its present course forever, and if you do not stand up and act, you will almost surely find yourselves in a nasty pickle.

Act you must, if you wish to survive; you can do it! At the beginning of WWII, the Shinto religion shared many of the more troublesome aspects of Islam, and largely because of that, many Americans of Japanese descent were herded off to internment camps because friend could not easily be discerned from foe.

What did the Japanese Americans do? Well, for example, they joined the military and became heros in defense of the United States. They took their oath seriously, not in the spirit of Islam's well-known taqiyya and kitman, and they did not use their positions in the military as a means of sabotaging the war effort or "fragging" their officers. They were true heroes, and in less than a generation after the war, they became respected citizens of the United States once again.

You can do it, my friends, and I suggest that if you need to form secret "resistence" groups against those who would kill you for your heresy, like those formed by those opposing the Nazis in Europe during WWII, then do so, and do it quickly.

Take the poll seriously. Consider the alternative if you don't. Americans are becoming impatient with our PC politicians who refuse to take common-sense measures in the best interests of our beloved country.

You may have noticed that Americans aren't inclined to sit around on their hands, waiting for the government to "do something." We have always been a "can-do" people. One of our favorite old saying goes, "If you want something done right, do it yourself." For example, we are growing tired of our President's abject refusal, for whatever reason, to carry out his oath of office and protect the borders, so we are beginning to do the job ourselves. Watch us as we continue to move in the direction of protecting our country by each and every means necessary, including electing officials who understand what must be done. Many of us--and that includes this blogger--plan to enthusiastically support the candidacy of reality-oriented politicians of integrity like Tom Tancredo for president, who would take whatever measures necessary to put an end to this lethal ongoing Islamic temper tantrum.

As the Muslim community knows as well as anyone, there is currently a lot of speculation growing that lethal devices of some sort, possibly even radiological, have been placed about this country in various locations--some suggest that they are hidden in mosques. If this is so, and if they are used, it will be too late for you. Even those among you who are 1) in complete opposition to terrorism AND 2) desire co-existence AND 3) oppose the forced conversion of the earth into a Muslim planet will, unfortunately, unavoidably suffer the consequences.

Many of us understand that living under the system you live under, with its totalitarian control, its continuous stream of threats for deviation of any kind, its prohibition of questioning Islam in any way, its micromanagement of your lives to the point where you have no time to do anything other than figure out how to avoid the fires of hell, can drain you of your confidence in your own competence, of your self-esteem, and of your courage. But if you have any shred left of self-esteem and courage, and some ideas about how to stop the madness, ACT, don't just sit there, hoping you won't be mistaken for the
enemy.

Time is running out.
 

~~~~~

The Greatest Con Game in History

Folks,

Do you remember the Klingons? They had a technology that could shield their warships by rendering them invisible to the Federation Starships. This allowed them to attack, undetected until it was too late, anyone in the galaxy.

Islam has a "shield technology" too, and it is using it brilliantly.

They use their claim to be a legitimate "religion" to render their goal of world domination effectively invisible to their intended victims. Their claim that their cause is a sacred one renders them immune from scrutiny, and from appropriate response from the rest of us.

Here's the scoop:

In the West, we have a solid tradition of respect for independent thought, including the freedom to choose how we express our spiritual lives. Our spiritual choices are considered to be personal and free of compulsion from the government.

In the United States, this respect goes back to the very founding of the country; Thomas Jefferson, for example, said he didn't care if someone believed in twenty gods or none.

The Framers of the Constitution listened to a pre-Revolutionary writer named Robert Molesworth, whose thinking was considered pivotal in the justification of the Revolution. He had, among many other things, studied the matter of totalitarianism, and found that one of the most effective ways a government had of immunizing itself from criticism was to fuse with religion. If the state was able to pull off such a fusion, then it could be considered an agent of God rather than a human production. By that logic, any criticism or opposition could be elevated to the status of "sin" instead of mere honest intellectual disagreement.

Recall that the Founders justified the dissolution of political ties with Britain because King George III, whose position also made him the Head of the Church of England, had been in the habit of violating individual rights. One of the problems faced by the Colonists was that their criticism of the Crown was not well received, and the suggestions for change in policy were ignored.

The cardinal reason for the Revolution was to design a new country from scratch, where the sole function of the government was to protect individual rights. They did it, and for the first time in the history of mankind, a nation was born based on the Enlightenment principles of reason and rights, and the very purpose of its existence was to protect individual rights.

The Declaration of Independence made it clear that should the government stray from that purpose, it was the right, even the obligation, of the citizens to alter or even abolish it.

Any fusion of religion with the state would run counter to the Framers' desire to protect the freedom of the citizens not
only to choose their own way of expressing their spiritual lives, but of criticizing (to say nothing of altering or
abolishing) the government.

This freedom was considered to be so important that these are the very first words in the Bill of Rights: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. . ."

"Fusion" is thus Islam's gimmick, the "shield" it uses that allows it to fly under the radar to destroy our country.

Islam--"submission" in Arabic--is an entity where state and religion are totally fused. The Koran is their constitution in addition to being a manual of instruction on how to conquer the world. Sharia, the law of the Ummah, is the word of Allah himself, derived from Islam's canonical documents--the Koran, the Hadith, and the Sirat Rasul Allah.

The "religion-state complex," the fused entity called Islam, is therefore considered to be the creation of Allah, and it
takes precedence over all things conceived or created by human beings--things like the United States and the Constitution.
As a political science professor at Yale, Imam Zaid Shakir has said, "The Koran pushes us (Muslims) in the exact opposite
direction to the forces at work in the American political spectrum." As a result, the Imam states the Muslims can't accept
the legitimacy of the existing (American) system.

Since Islam considers itself to be the agent of Allah on earth, it considers as "sins" any questions, criticism or
alteration of any kind, and obviously, it would never tolerate its abolition. Under sharia, the "sins" make the "heretic" or "apostate" thinking them eligible for the death penalty. This set of prohibitions against "immoral" thinking, speaking, and behavior, along with the religiously proscribed punishments implemented by Allah's agent on earth, Islam, is what scares the few followers of Islam who would like to see reform.

For those of us in the West, the thing that makes us so reluctant to reveal what's behind the PC Curtain is our complete respect for the freedom of anyone to believe whatever he wants.We feel very self-conscious about snooping into the personal beliefs of others. "Religion" is something one doesn't even bring up in polite conversation with people we don't know well. And that's OK; you can believe the moon is made of green cheese if you wish.

We in the West would be--and are--horrified by those among us who would impose, by law, their beliefs on others. Persuade, yes; compel, no. That's why we even have trouble believing, even while reading Islam's canonical documents, that terrorists are carrying out their religious obligations.

Not only are the active terrorists doing so, but so are those who support them by funding them, by sympathizing with their purpose, and by those who merely fail to object. These morepassive people are also carrying out their religious obligations. More than that, they have all have been granted the moral authority to do whatever it takes, up to and including murder and mayhem, to accomplish the goal that Mohammad set out when he established Islam. That was the original goal, and it remains the goal today--world conquest.

It is PRECISELY our respect for the freedom of the individual to choose his own spiritual life that makes us so reluctant to see the danger represented by the "Fusion." It's our own virtue being used to destroy us. If Mohammad had been able to see into the future, he could have done nothing that would have been more effective as a "stealth" weapon against us than his invention of his military machine and then calling it a "religion." So reluctant are we to examine Islam that we insist that terrorism etc. are the actions of a "tiny minority of extremists who have hijacked and perverted a great religion of peace and tolerance."

Our spiritual lives, in contrast to Islam's, don't involve religiously sanctioned/state funded terrorism, throat-slitting,
RPG's, flogging, killing thousands by flying planes into skyscrapers, blowing up subways and school buses, and on, and on, and on, and on. . .That is the function of the state/religion complex of Islam.

If Islam's thinking and behavior were stripped clean of its self-appointed partnership with the divine, the West would have no problem seeing it for what it is--a world-wide gang of thugs bent on destroying us.

We tend to forget that while one may believe whatever he wishes, one may not ACT in a manner that violates the rights of another. That prohibition against the violation of rights includes religious expression. Such actions are the initiation of the use of physical force, and its intellectual equivalent, fraud and deceit. All of these--physical force, fraud and deceit--are weapons of war that are religiously sanctioned by Islam.

Osama openly declared war on us, but we just won't listen. Sometimes, someone will ask, "But how can we declare war, when there is no particular country that has attacked us? There are Muslims in every country in the world. What would the target be?"

The target is Islam.

We can, and ought to, openly declare war on Islam, wherever it exists. We must not allow its claim to be a product of the divine to render its ambitions and weapons invisible to us, and immune to a proper response. Sure, our method of fighting a war will have to shift to meet current conditions; so?

Yes, there are millions upon millions of Muslims around the world, operating in all countries to bring others into the
Ummah, forcibly if need be, and working to create a world-wide Caliphate. However, the fact that millions of people today are followers of Islam because their ancestors had the misfortune to be intimidated and forced to become followers of Mohammad, alters nothing.

Millions of pious enemies are still enemies.