Islam's Perpetual War With The West

"Battle of Abukir" by Antoine-Jean Gros, 1806, Musee National du Chateau, Versailles

 

Don't be surprised to see an even more emboldened Thug-In-Chief Ahmadinejad in the coming weeks and months - becoming the head of the family tends to have that sort of effect. But I don't mean to be disrespectful about anyone's loss of a loved one and that doesn't exclude even our Thug-In-Chief.

"Any action for the sake of God would not fail." Words from Ayatollah Khomeini, absolute ruler during the first ten years following the 1979 revolution, obtained the title of "Imam", being the highest religious rank in Shia, creator of the theocratic rule over Iran and its first Supreme Leader following the establishment of the Islamic Republic of Iran, define Ahmadinejad's quest. Notice especially the crucial nuance "would not fail"; a major departure from "would be justified". The latter implies deliberation, the former guarantees success. Ahmadinejad's words and actions reveal his total and complete conviction in the absolute truth of Khomeini's words. He does not posture as some would have us believe.

Now, where do you think our Thug-In-Chief sees himself in ten years... Khomeini is his role model and Ahmadinejad believes to be his heir apparent, the one who will continue the process where his mentor left off:

Khomeini did not fulfil his pre-revolution promises to the people of Iran but instead he started to marginalize and crash the opposition groups and those who opposed the clerical rules. He ordered establishment of many institutions to consolidate power and safeguard the cleric leadership. During his early years in power he launched the Cultural Revolution in order to Islamize the whole country. Many people were laid off, and lots of books were revised or burnt according to the new Islamic values. Newly established Islamic Judiciary system sentenced many Iranians to death and long-term imprisonment as they were in opposition to those radical changes.

More of this is in store for the Iranian  people and they know it. After all during the 1970's Khomeini was dependent on help from outside Iran. We forget, that apart from his friends in Beirut, Khomeini was supported by what he called "revolutionary Muslims" in Europe, United States, Pakistan and Afghanistan. Now we know of course... but amazingly, it still seems to come as a surprise.

Take the latest example of the alleged terrorist plot in Canada. Immediate talk of discriminatory backlash is the Muslims' swift switch from the defensive to the offensive. Well, let's try to put an end to that never ending cycle of renewed and conveniently self-imposed amnesia, especially by the members of the MSM and our venerable members of the left performing hitherto unparalleled contortionist acts to keep their NSA and FISA crusade alive. We still remain clueless.

It is not us who are at war with Islam, it is Islam who since time immemorial fuels its hatred against Infidels and since the last decades against secular western democracies and thus has been and remains at war with us. The Islamic Republic of Iran is their role model and we must stop closing our eyes before that truth.

Mosques the world over preach the hatred against anything and everything representing the West, taking their cues from our Thug-In-Chief and his mentor Thug-Über-Chief Ayatollah Khomeini:

The hate from the Iranian side has been explicit and overt. From the “Death to America” slogans that can be heard in virtually every government-sponsored mass gathering for over 25 years, to huge billboards with the same hate content adorning premium sites in Tehran and elsewhere, the message is clear. The Iranian regime does not look at the US as its adversary but as an object of hate. The slogan refers not to the US administration but to America. Compare this to the attitude shown by the Iranian regime towards its adversary Iraq during the 8 long years of fighting and bloodshed. There, all the hate was being directed at Saddam personally and not Iraq. You never heard a slogan like “Death to Iraq”, but always “Death to Saddam”. Along with the US, only three other countries in the world have been subject of “Death to” slogans under the Islamic Republic regime: Israel, Britain and the old USSR (on occasions).

From the American side, too, the element of hate can be detected. However, this hate is specifically directed at the Iranian regime and not the Iranian people or the Iranian State. How else the US government’s repeated statements that it respects the Iranian people and has high regards for them can be explained?

In other words, the US distaste for the Iranian regime has come as a reaction to the Iranian attitude. The hate relationship started from the Iranian side, its cause being partly historical and partly ideological. [...] The major part was ideological: viewing America as the bastion of Western civilisation so much anathema to the backward thinking of the Mollahs, or as the Imperialist power so much the object of hatred by the ideological Left who greatly influenced the new Islamic regime.

We must stop jumping at every gesture as the ultimate evidence to support the desperately foolish idea that Islam wishes to coexist with us Infidels in peace. All it wishes to do is to bide its time until it is ready to conquer. Period. Read Khomeini's manifesto and take it seriously; understand that it underpins everything Imams teach in Mosques the world over, not just what our Thug-In-Chief spews out. Read in particular the last pages, from which I quote an excerpt [a screen-shot, hence the script]

Comments

[Alexandra]

Ali,

Perhaps we should pay as much attention to your paintings as we do your writing.

Since you think both my images and my writing are not up to your high standards I am sure you will miss neither. Goodbye and good luck.

[Kenny Pierce]

Ali,

Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof. We can't fight every battle at once.

Besides, I hardly think there's any great danger that the Republican Party, by saying that Hitchens and Hirsi Ali are right about political oppression in the Middle East, will be understood by anybody to be endorsing European-style enforced secularism.

If the Democratic Party (in which practically all agressive European-style American secularists reside) were enthusiastically to endorse Hitchens and Hirsi Ali, then there would be marginally more cause for concern, though still not a lot because by no means all Democrats are aggressive secularists of that stripe -- but since the Democratic Party is largely under the sway of people who hate Dubya far more than they care about oppressed Middle Eastern women, there is little danger of such an endorsement in the immediate future.

[ali eteraz]

kenny,

since alexandra removed my link to the post, you'll have to go to my website, and run a search for 'radical atheism.'

alexandra,

do you have a commenting policy that states that we cannot include links in our comments? poor kenny has to go and search for it on his own. can i ask why you removed it?

by the way, what happeneed to following blog etiquette? the two times in recent memory i've cited to your cite, you've deleted my links from your trackback section. that's very curious.

[ali eteraz]

kenny, if you read my article you'll see that the point isn't that if you aren't with the atheists you're automatically with the theist bin laden. the point was that when we theists in *our* society hand off critiquing other (so called) theists, in this case bin laden, we are risking empowering them for later attacks against us. this is why i think we theists are being short-sighted. great, woohoo, today hrsi ali and sam harris are great cuz they are bashing bin laden. ten years down the road, once they have the pull and the power, they are going to say: oh, by the way, it isn't just the extremist theists who are bad, its all theists, and let's throw all their God centric morality out the door. like i said in my piece, political necessity shouldn't trump sense.

[deleted link by ATB]

[Kenny Pierce]

Oh, and on Bush as Napoleon...here all this time I thought the implied historical reference had to do with Napoleon's notoriously unimpressive, um, male endowment. [grinning]

[Kenny Pierce]

Ali,

I'm a thoroughgoing theist, but when it comes to Islamism (to be distinguised, of course, from the Islam practiced by my beloved Kazakh friends) I have way more in common with the atheist Christopher Hitchens than I do with the theist Osama bin Laden.

One could argue that the American genius is to have recognized simultaneously both that (a) religion is important and God matters (contra Hitchens, a significant minority of the angry Left, twentieth-century atheist dictators of every stripe, and the European oligarchs), and (b) that when it comes to government, there are critical things that everybody needs to agree about for society to be worth living in but religion is not one of those things (contra Islamists, a significant chunk of the angry Religious Right, and the various competing Christian churches from Constantine up through most of the seventeenth century).

[ali eteraz]

Well, then, for depicting the carnage that Napolean caused (in this painting) (and also for dressing invasive president up as Napolean), I commend you. I am kind of intrigued now that it is revealed that you dressed Bush up as the greatest butcher of the 19th century. Perhaps we should pay as much attention to your paintings as we do your writing.

[Alexandra]

George Bush dressed up like George Washington in a post where you praise his stance on security.

Yes Ali, Napoleon does look a lot like George Washington. Is that in your "linear" world?

The painting's message I chose for this post does not relate to a linear thought no matter how much you may wish it to, and neither does every one of the 350 odd images on this blog. Period.

[ali eteraz]

By the way, as far as the images go: they usually are pretty linear.

Kerry in a turban dressed up like a Berber Muslim in an anti-Kerry post.

George Bush dressed up like Geroge Washington in a post where you praise his stance on security.

A picture of a man with two faces in a post where you accuse Democrats (Murtha) of hypocrisy.

Those seem pretty linear to me. Of course, I am not using linear pejoratively as you did.

[ali eteraz]

Of course, I stand by those remarks. Theists, which happens to include me, should not be propogating atheists. That's very simple in my eyes. We don't share value concerns with atheists. A cursory glance at the ACLU and other a-theist organizations would show you that.

If you would read that post further I quote Dymphna approvingly b/c she recognized that point.

Nor did I call you short-sighted, but simply of your understanding of this particular issue.

[Alexandra]

Ali,

there are far more appropriate paintings which would make islam seem the aggressor. in the case of napolean and egypt, he was the invader.

Thank you for the history lesson, but believe it or not my choice of paintings and images are not as linear as your imagination seems to be. Btw thanks for another compliment you gave me recently:

The Baroness, a self-proclaimed hardcore Christian and theist, has no problem advocating self-proclaimed atheists like Wafa Sultan and Ayyan Hirsi Ali. At a cursory glance this makes sense, because these atheists hate Islam and say the right things. But this is a short-sighted understanding of what is occurring. A quick jaunt through the entirety of the theist blogosphere will reveal similar short-sighted advocacy

[ali eteraz]

baroness,

I'm rather confused by the use of this painting, on a post in which islam is being thrust as the aggressor.

the battle of abuqir featured the french under napolean in egypt. the egyptian campaign, if you recall, was part of the napoleonic wars in which napolean was the aggressor. not only that, but in those wars the ottoman empire was allied with the british and the russians and the prussians to defeat napolean.

there are far more appropriate paintings which would make islam seem the aggressor. in the case of napolean and egypt, he was the invader.

[Kenny Pierce]

There's the Ghost we know and love...welcome back.

Insofar as I understand you (always an important caveat in responding to your comments), I think I mostly agree with you.

BTW, I don't mean to be critical in saying it's usually a challenge to understand you. You're like my son Sean in that your mind works very differently from mine, making any conversation an interesting and unpredictable challenge.

[Ghost Dansing]

There is Chritianity, then there is christofascism. There is Islam, then there is islamofascism.

There is religion that is a societal construct, more or less assisting human beings in their pursuit of spirituality and that which appears within but transcends their existence, and their is religion that is warped, manipulated and exploited for the purpose of aggegating political power.

It can empirically be stated, at least, that humanity is a prolific manufacturer of religions, and religion-making itself may be the progenitor of the socially constructed reality that allows for the creation of secular, functional governance based on the provision existential human needs...spiritual pursuits being but one of them.

Most religions manifest in the human population (where else?) that have widespread adherence, benefited from an historic deal with the Devil that spread adherency by the point of a sword as much, or more, than peaceful conversion based on attraction.

Any organized religion can be exploited for purposes of political power, because religions inherently divide the population...sometimes in spite of inclusive rhetoric.

[Kenny Pierce]

A point of clarification: Ghost's last post is a section from the Wikipedia article on Fred Phelps, including the paragraphs I mentioned having left out in my earlier comment.

I think what that means is that Ghost and I are now agreed that he won't blame the Republicans for Phelps's lunacy and I won't blame the Democrats. ;-)

[Ghost Dansing]

In the 1980s prior to Phelps protesting at funerals, the Phelps family were supporters of then-senator Al Gore's Presidential aspirations. The basement of Fred Phelps Jr.'s law office supposedly acted as Gore's Kansas campaign office, and the Phelps hosted a fundraiser. Numerous photos exist on the Internet of Fred Phelps Jr. and his second wife, Betty Phelps-Schurle, posing with Al and Tipper Gore. Phelps Jr. also served as a Gore delegate on the floor of the Democratic National Convention in Atlanta in 1988.

During Bill Clinton's presidential campaign, Fred Phelps Jr. and members of Westboro campaigned for Gore, though simultaneously attacking Hillary Clinton. In January 1993, Fred Phelps Jr. and Betty Phelps-Schurle were invited to the inaugural ball in Washington, D.C.

In the ensuing years leading up to Clinton's second presidential campaign, Gore and Clinton took stances increasingly in favor of gay rights. Consequently, Westboro turned against Gore, who nevertheless invited Fred Phelps, Marge, Fred Jr., and Betty back for the 1997 inauguration; they responded by bringing the entire Westboro congregation to the White House and picketing on the front lawn during the ball, with signs proclaiming that Gore, Clinton, and both men's families were going to Hell, not necessarily for their stances on homosexuality, but because they had "betrayed" Westboro.

In 1998, Westboro picketed the funeral of Gore's father, screaming vulgarities at Gore and telling him "your dad's in Hell."

Westboro signs with politican messages have read:

AL GORE FAMILY VALUES (with a cartoon of two men having [deleted, sorry ghost, spam bots paranoia)
GO HOME (with a cartoon of Bill Clinton)
BABY KILLER (with a cartoon of Hillary Clinton)
BABY KILLER (with a cartoon of Bill Clinton)
FAG GORE

Phelps has failed in numerous Democratic primary elections for governor of the overwhelmingly Republican state of Kansas, in 1990, 1994, and the last time in 1998, when he came in second with 15,000 votes out of a total of over 103,000 votes cast, or 15%.

In the aftermath of the election, in an incident that would be repeated years later when Phelps circulated a fuzzy petition to outlaw homosexual work protection, many of the Kansas Democrats who had cast votes for Phelps came forward to express their distaste for him. They claimed that Phelps had lied about his intentions to numerous constituents, using double-talk and fuzzy language to confuse them; neglected to mention his stances on race, religion, and homosexuality, and campaigned mainly on the platform of a "good ol' boy" Southern gentleman and retired lawyer unfairly prosecuted by the system.

[ElMondoHummus]

Christofascist?

Look, all, I'm as offended as anyone over the corruption and abuse of religion as a crutch for the misanthrops in society, but I gotta draw the line here. When Episcopalians start suicide bombing folks, when Baptists start hijacking airplanes, when Catholics start burning buildings and embassies in response to editorial cartoons, when Presbyterians start beheading folks on video, then you can start comparing Christians to Radical Militant Islamicists. Only then. Not before. Let's keep things in perspective, folks, and not start hounding all religions for the blasphemies and evils of the few within one.

[Patty]

I shall not go into a long dialog over this. I believe the Christians have turned the other cheek so long they expect to be kicked around. As the majority in this county they have become complaicent let the gueard down. Its time they wake up before the likes of this nemotoad starts the biggest war this planet has ever seen.

[Kenny Pierce]

Ghost,

>
I bet I know [the Rev. Fred Phelps's] political affiliation.
>

Your guess is Democrat, right? Though I'm sure it's not a guess, since the internet has made it so easy to do research I can't imagine you haven't taken the simple step of checking Wikipedia:

In the 1980s prior to Phelps protesting at funerals,[22] the Phelps family were supporters of then-senator Al Gore's Presidential aspirations. The basement of Fred Phelps Jr.'s law office supposedly acted as Gore's Kansas campaign office, and the Phelps hosted a fundraiser. Numerous photos exist on the Internet of Fred Phelps Jr. and his second wife, Betty Phelps-Schurle, posing with Al and Tipper Gore. Phelps Jr. also served as a Gore delegate on the floor of the Democratic National Convention in Atlanta in 1988.

During Bill Clinton's presidential campaign, Fred Phelps Jr. and members of Westboro campaigned for Gore, though simultaneously attacking Hillary Clinton. In January 1993, Fred Phelps Jr. and Betty Phelps-Schurle were invited to the inaugural ball in Washington, D.C...

Phelps has failed in numerous Democratic primary elections for governor of the overwhelmingly Republican state of Kansas, in 1990, 1994, and the last time in 1998, when he came in second with 15,000 votes out of a total of over 103,000 votes cast, or 15%...

Phelps has repeatedly championed Fidel Castro for Castro's stance against homosexuality; in 1998 Harper's magazine published a letter Phelps sent to Castro in which he praised Castro and lambasted the U.S... [Doesn't make him in itself a Democrat but let's face it, how much of the Right is composed of Castro fans and how much of the Left still thinks Che Guevara shirts are chic?]...

In 2003, before the fall of Saddam Hussein during the Iraq War, Phelps wrote Hussein a letter praising his regime...

Phelps mourned the fall of Hussein's regime and has consistently criticized the invasion of Iraq, citing, "IRAQ+USA=SODOM." He also keeps a toll on his webpage celebrating the death of every American soldier killed and pronounces loyalty to Iraq.

Yeah, I'd say there's no doubt which of the two parties Phelps prefers -- not that either one wants him.

Now, I'll give you a hint: you should go read the article for yourself since I have deliberately excised, for the sake of rhetorical effect, the parts where Phelps got furious with Gore and Clinton over their support for gay rights and turned against them, and also the parts in which the Democrats disavow him.

Look, Ghost, the guy is a nutcase. To blame his pathologies on either party, or to pretend that he is in any way, shape or form representative of either, is to be almost as insane as he is. That comment was unworthy of you. I hope you don't intend to make a habit of stopping to that level; it would be a severe disappointment.

[Freedom Fighter]

Well done, Alexandra. I've linked to this.

As for the mainstream media, it's almost amusing that they are caught between two conflicting "scripts" on Islam.. and the cognitive dissonance is mind blowing.

One comment when it comes to Wahabism and Arabs as opposed to Iran and Shia Islam...when push comes to shove they will unite in the name of jihad and squabble over the spoils later.

This has historically been true not only of the Arabs and Persians, but of the Arabs and Turks, which is why the Ottoman Empire was so successful for so long.

Islam trumps everything.It always has and always will.

[Ghost Dansing]

We should learn a lesson from Iran; recognize the social pathology and resist the fascist whether wearing the skin of the Lamb or the mantle of the Prophet.

This is what we would have in America should the religious fanatics dominate our government.

Conservative Christian broadcaster Pat Robertson told citizens of a Pennsylvania town that they had rejected God by voting their school board out of office for supporting "intelligent design" and warned them Thursday not to be surprised if disaster struck. Robertson, a former Republican presidential candidate and founder of the influential Christian Broadcasting Network and Christian Coalition, has made similar apocalyptic warnings and provocative statements before. Last summer, he hit the headlines by calling for the assassination of leftist Venezuelan Present Hugo Chavez, one of President George W. Bush's most vocal international critics. "I'd like to say to the good citizens of Dover: if there is a disaster in your area, don't turn to God, you just rejected Him from your city," Robertson said on his daily television show broadcast from Virginia, "The 700 Club.""And don't wonder why He hasn't helped you when problems begin, if they begin. I'm not saying they will, but if they do, just remember, you just voted God out of your city. And if that's the case, don't ask for His help because he might not be there," he said.

The term 'Christofascist' is meant as a warning to real, patriotic Americans who truly understand the principles and concepts behind the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights. Radicals like Roberston, Falwell and Phelps are the antithesis of the proposition "that ALL men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." The threat of disaster, or the threat of the denial of life and liberty expressed towards those who freely chose, is a step towards tyranny.

It would be useless to prevail over islamofacism only to annoint christofascsim in our own midst. Unfortunately, this crowd represents a base constituency for one of our major political parties. All should know, that when voting Republican, you bring a little Fred Phelps into the power of governance.

The Rev. Fred Phelps, founder of Westboro Baptist in Kansas, contends that American soldiers are being killed in Iraq as vengeance from God for protecting a country that harbors gays. The church, which is not affiliated with a larger denomination, is made up mostly of Phelps’ children, grandchildren and in-laws.

I bet I know his political affiliation.

[Kenny Pierce]

Irving,

That's a good point except that it's not a terribly important one. With all due respect -- and I do agree with your point -- Iran's regime is a danger but the culture as a whole is much less of one. However, Iran is not Arab, and the poison of Wahabbism is concentrated in Arab countries. A highly disproportionate number of Arab hate crimes and terrorist acts are commited by Arabs, and even of those Muslim acts of violence that are committed by non-Arabs, the majority are committed by people whose mentors are Arabs. Arabs are a minority of the world's Muslims, and I think probably Arab nut-cases are a (regrettably significant) minority of the worlds Arabs -- but solve the problem of Wahabbite evil and there will be very little left of the Muslim problem to solve. I don't think anybody thinks the Iranian man-on-the-street is a threat to the West except the ones who don't know the difference between Farsi and Arabic.

[Terry Baker]

Love your wonderful site.
I think we should take these fanatics at their word. They have nothing to lose - there is no fall back position from the 7th century.

[rich]

On the topic of the arrests in Canada and the broken windows in the buildings and automobiles.

Is not there a history of this yype of vandalism being done by supporters of those arrested? As propaganda to show how Western society threatens them and to wrong foot the righteous anger of those who were about to be victims of an attack.

Personally I think the damage was not done by ordinary Canadiens, but rather by Islamist radicals who may also be Canadiens.

[Irving Karchmar]

Islamic radicalism will go the way of communism's perpetual war with the West in another 50 years, after much bloodshed on both sides. This tribal thinking, this US vs THEM mentality will eventually give way to social democracy. Why? Because the world grows smaller with new innovation in technology. I talk to folks in Iran over the internet, and they all hate the millionaire Mullahs living in luxury.

[North by Northwest]

"Then, of course, we will adopt a different attitude toward them".

What a chilling statement. I don't know about you guys, but I find such worded threats the most blood-curdling. Especially when you know that murder is on their minds.

Well done, Alexandra for bringing this 'manifesto' to our attention. I've only managed to glance at the 94-page document, but it is already clear that nearly every page is filled with blood-thirsty forewarnings. Again, ignore at your own peril...