It's not Political Correctness, it's Sharia.

[Warrior-Mentor]

November 12, 2009
It Isn't Political Correctness, It's Shariah
By Pamela Geller

In surveying the cultural carnage in the wake of the worst terrorist attack on a military installation in US history, it bears noting that there have been seismic shifts in America. When America was free of the shackles of Islam, say, fifty years ago, the current response to such an attack by an enemy faction would have been unthinkable.

I have watched in abject horror the stunning reaction of elites in this country to this act of war. The denial, the submission, the excuses, the dodging, the self-flagellation, the shame, the deceiving of the American people by the media, the military, society, law enforcement, authorities and politicians, all the way up to and including the White House, amounts to the enforcement of Shariah law.

Shariah law forbids criticism of Islam. And here we are.

We are witnessing an Islamized America. This is well beyond political correctness. We are enforcing Shariah law. We will not insult Islam. That is Shariah law. We self censor. That is Shariah law. We disrespect ourselves, our nation, so that we might respect Islam. This is dhimmitude. We should be raging. We should be outraged. We should be strategizing for this worldwide conflict. We should be debating about which leader will best handle Islam's war on the West. And yet we have not one leader who begins to understand the conflict -- that's how feared the subject matter is. Not one leader.


Recently there was an interesting debate at National Review Online between soft conservatives who soft-pedal Islam and those who stand for reality of Islamic doctrine, conservative principles and the essential truth. By and large, the conservatives have dropped the ball on Islamic jihad. This has been made painfully clear by the lack of a leader (any leader) on the right who speaks to and takes up the fight against the sweeping Islamization of America. America has no Geert Wilders.

The conservatives are not really as bad as the Left is on Islam, but they only get real when there is jihadi "intervention" that invades and destroys the delusion of their narrative.

It is interesting to me that the hierarchy of the conservative movement (take CPAC, for example) stays far away from the counter-jihad forces (i.e., Robert Spencer, Andrew Bostom, myself) except at moments like these. Last year there was not one speaker, one event at CPAC that spoke to the greatest threat this nation faces -- which is why I staged the Geert Wilders event at the Omni Hotel, during CPAC (but not a CPAC event) last year.

When the reality of war, Islamic doctrine and bloodshed lays bare the nature of the enemy and the battle we are in, the door creaks open and Robert Spencer starts getting invited to appear on radio shows, and NRO finally runs pieces by Bostom and Spencer that show up the soft conservative narrative on Islam, which is soft and fuzzy and stupid (i.e., "Islamist" vs "Islamic"). Of course, we bad boys will be put back in our boxes until the next terrible time the jihad comes calling.

It pains me to say it, but expect to see us more frequently in the coming months and years. For the giant con job on the American psyche continues apace: He was a crazy! It was "vicarious" Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder! It was "Pre-Traumatic" Stress Disorder! It was radical extremism! It was part of a tiny fringe! It doesn't represent Islam!

All lies. He was devout. He was a jihadist. Period. And many Muslims admire what he did. The Left worries about Muslim backlash. How about Muslim backlash against the infidels? Every "Soldier of Allah" who goes jihad is an enemy combatant. Every devout Muslim who believes in the word of the Quran has his or her duty to Islam, his call to jihad. Hence this terrible act of war, the 14,363 Islamic attacks across the world since 911, and all of the relentless plots, plans and to take down America in the past month alone. Devout Muslims should be prohibited from military service.

Would Patton have recruited Nazis into his army?

I am writing this on Veterans Day. I call upon all Americans to step back, consider the unfathomable loss at Fort Hood, the ensuing apologia, and the tragic consequences of such behavior. This is a call to action. You're either with us or against us.

Pamela Geller is the editor and publisher of the Atlas Shrugs Web site and is former associate publisher of the New York Observer.

Find it here:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/...rrectness.html

Also here:
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/a...-thinker-.html

[Richard]

Would Patton have recruited Nazis into his army?

Perhaps...but Patton was more pragmatic than the headlines often indicated as related in an anecdote here by Robert S. Allen, a cavalry officer with service in the Regular Army, National Guard, and Army Reserve, who was General Patton's chief of combat intelligence. He was promoted to colonel on General Patton's recommendation and was twice personally decorated by him. He wrote Lucky Forward, a best-seller history of the Third Army, commanded by Patton.

Patton's Secret: "I Am Going to Resign From the Army."

<snip>

He returned to Third Amy, which was in charge of administering Bavaria, and dropped out of public sight until 22 September, when he held a requested press conference at his headquarters in Bad Tolz, south of Munich.

That affair was the beginning of the end for Patton--both professionally and personally.

Within a few hours after his meeting with the newsmen, Patton was again in the headlines and once more in hot water with civilian and military superiors. What happened was this: As the conference was closing, a correspondent, who bad never attended a Patton session before and who in several previous questions had evinced an unfriendly attitude, asked why Nazis were being retained in office in Bavaria. The question was obviously loaded, with the evident purpose of causing embarrassment.

General Gay, Patton's able and devoted chief of staff, vigorously shook his head signaling him not to answer. Patton saw Gay's warning, but disregarded it.

"I despise and abhor Nazis and Hitlerism as much as anyone," he said. "My record on that is clear and unchallengeable. It is to be found on battlefields from Morocco to Bad Tolz In supervising the functioning of the Bavarian government, which is my mission, the first thing that happened was that the outs accused the ins of being Nazis. Now, more than half the German people were Nazis and we would be in a hell of a fix if we removed all Nazi party members from office.

"The way I see it, this Nazi question is very much like Democratic and Republican election fight. To get things done in Bavaria, after the virtually complete disorganization and disruption of four years of war, we had to compromise with the devil a little. We had no alternative but to of turn to people who knew what to do and how to do it, So, for the time being we are compromising with the devil to that extent.

"It's regrettable, but a very urgent and vital job has to be done to put this shattered country back on its feet again. We are trying to do that as best we can with the personnel available. That's the whole story.

I don't like Nazis any more than you do. I despise them. In the past three years I did my utmost to kill as many of them as possible. Now we are using them for lack of anyone better until we can get better people."

<snip>

http://www.pattonhq.com/textfiles/resign.html

[Rogue]

Free Speech ..... or is it?

[nmap]

You know...it occurs to me that there is a way to deal with this.

Start advocating, and stridently so, application of Sharia law.

So - and please correct me if I'm wrong - thieves get their right hand chopped off publicly. They are then released, still bleeding, and receive no help unless it is from friends and relatives.

I am under the impression that there are penalties for homosexuals as well. Surely Hollywood would embrace the Islamic perspective on the issue.

No doubt there are other draconian provisions. Fine. Apply them.

And for those who object on constitutional grounds, the restriction is on "cruel and unusual punishment." Surely any devout Moslem would dispute that they are either.

Yes, I think that the next burglar...car thief...shoplifter...hot check artist...hedge fund fraud...needs to be hauled to a local version of Saudi Arabia's chop-chop square and dealt with.

This is, by the way, somewhat (but not entirely) tongue in cheek, in the spirit of Jonathan Swift's "Modest Proposal". But if people really want to embrace Islam, maybe they should get a good taste of it.

[Sigaba]

I do not agree with Pamela Geller's central argument that America would be a safer place if people were more like her.

[T-Rock]

I do not agree with Pamela Geller's central argument that America would be a safer place if people were more like her.

I don’t see how you get that from what she had to say

IMO, what she’s pointing out is that - why in the world would someone who knows exactly what Islam inculcates, and knows its effects on the minds of many of its adherents, and understands perfectly the figure of Muhammad and what such a figure offered up as worthy of emulation as the Perfect Man, means?

Why defend Islam which commands Sharia, the division of the world, between Believer and Unbeliever, Muslim and Infidel - The state of permanent war that Muslim’s are taught must exist….?

I think she’s exposing that those who are apologizing for Islamic Sharia are in fact enabling it…just my .02

[Sigaba]

Originally Posted by T-Rock

I don’t see how you get that from what she had to say

She takes others' disagreement with her view point as license to question their intellect, politics, and integrity. She sums up her view: "You're either with us or against us."

In her view, "us" consists of herself, Mr. Spencer, Mr. Bostom, Mr. Wilders, and herself. Which brings us to the five letter word upon which she seems most focused: power. Namely, her own.

Ms. Geller chides Americans for not paying sufficient attention to the supposed threat of Sharia law to American civilization. She blames others for the fact that her message doesn't resonate. Maybe it isn't the message but the messenger. Given the choice between being "right" and being an effective advocate, she picks the former.

She thinks that throwing a tantrum on a blog she can influence American elites will see it her way. Good luck with that.

Originally Posted by T-Rock

IMO, what she’s pointing out is that - why in the world would someone who knows exactly what Islam inculcates, and knows its effects on the minds of many of its adherents, and understands perfectly the figure of Muhammad and what such a figure offered up as worthy of emulation as the Perfect Man, means?

Do you really believe it is possible for human beings to understand "exactly" how other human beings interpret anything? Consider the best trained, most disciplined people you have ever known. Were they always on exactly the same page all the time? Did they in every instance interpret a communication precisely the same way? Was every directive, instruction, or order obeyed without the least bit of dissent, discussion, comment, or question?

Do you also believe that human beings are capable of "perfect" understanding of any topic?

Originally Posted by T-Rock

Why defend Islam which commands Sharia, the division of the world, between Believer and Unbeliever, Muslim and Infidel - The state of permanent war that Muslim’s are taught must exist….?

Do we know for a fact what over a billion Muslims are being taught?

There are all the comparisons of Islamic theology to Nazism. Yet those who have devoted their professional careers to understanding the latter still don't know for certain what Nazism was about. This state of imperfect knowledge comes despite the fact that they scour the planet for any and all information that might help them piece the puzzle together.

On the other hand, this wonderful cottage industry built by self describe experts on Islam rests on what? Blog posts linked to blog posts? Journalistic accounts taken off the internet? Google?

Where are the translations of sermons being delivered in mosques across the planet? Where are the transcripts of interviews and discussions in cafes, family rooms, farms, office buildings, and in chat rooms that show what a credible sample of Muslims really think, believe, and practice? Where are the field studies showing that the driving force in the Islamic world is Islam and not other factors such as gender, nationalism, politics (including the politics of religion), ethnicity, language, economics, age, psychology, culture, war, or even contingency?

Originally Posted by T-Rock

I think she’s exposing that those who are apologizing for Islamic Sharia are in fact enabling it…just my .02

IMO, the only thing she's exposing is her own egoism (the name of her blog is instructive, albeit not in the way she'd like) and her utterly abysmal understanding of the history of American strategic culture.

Meanwhile, she's deflecting attention and inquiry from where either would better serve her professed interest--figuring out why her message does not and finding more effective ways to communicate.

Then again, that would require her to put down her megaphone, climb down from the soap box, step out the limelight, and maybe do the kind of research, analysis, and communicating that is going to resonate with people other than those who already agree with her.

But she's obviously too important to the cause to do anything of the kind. And what would be the point? She already has a perfect understanding of exactly what over a billion people already think.

[nmap]

Originally Posted by Sigaba

Do you really believe it is possible for human beings to understand "exactly" how other human beings interpret anything?

Exact? Clearly not. One might even resort to physics to show that such exact equivalence may not exist anywhere.

But do we need such daunting precision to make useful statements? Were I to say (purely for example) "My tooth hurts" - failing to note which tooth or how badly - then I have communicated despite the lack of detail.

Returning to the article, we see: "And many Muslims admire what he did". We might quibble that there has been no survey, one with appropriate tests of validity and reliability, no random sampling, and no comparison with control groups. And yet - the impression remains. There appear to be some who do, in fact, admire his actions. Here is a link to a CNN video (6:52 length) LINK . Note that the author does not say all or most - she says many, which remains undefined.

So, then, from the perspective of popular writing by an author with the general public as the intended audience, I don't see how she's so far off target. MOO, YMMV.

[Warrior-Mentor]

"Jihadi leaders are surprisingly frank when discussing the vulnerabilities of their movement and their strategies for toppling local regimes and undermining the United States. Their candor is, in large part, a consequence of struggles for leadership within the movement; thus, a leader
of one group will publish his strategic vision in order to gain more recruits and achieve a reputation as a serious scholar worthy of respect. It is also a consequence of the United States’ success in destroying jihadi training camps and denying safe havens—jihadi leaders have had to put their writings online so as to provide continuing guidance to a very decentralized following."

- From "Stealing Al Qaida's Playbook

READ IT HERE:
http://ctc.usma.edu/pdf/Stealing%20A...20--%20CTC.pdf

Originally Posted by Sigaba

She takes others' disagreement with her view point as license to question their intellect, politics, and integrity. She sums up her view: "You're either with us or against us."

In her view, "us" consists of herself, Mr. Spencer, Mr. Bostom, Mr. Wilders, and herself. Which brings us to the five letter word upon which she seems most focused: power. Namely, her own.

This is a nonsequiter - a logic leap.

Originally Posted by Sigaba

Ms. Geller chides Americans for not paying sufficient attention to the supposed threat of Sharia law to American civilization. She blames others for the fact that her message doesn't resonate. Maybe it isn't the message but the messenger. Given the choice between being "right" and being an effective advocate, she picks the former.

Perhaps it's because people are too busy with their day-to-day lives to notice the creeping sharia. Or afraid to recognize the problem. Or unable, unwilling or afraid to do anything about it. "If I ignore the problem, it will go away. It works for ostriches, right?"

[QUOTE=Sigaba;296408]She thinks that throwing a tantrum on a blog she can influence American elites will see it her way. Good luck with that.Do you really believe it is possible for human beings to understand "exactly" how other human beings interpret anything? Consider the best trained, most disciplined people you have ever known. Were they always on exactly the same page all the time? Did they in every instance interpret a communication precisely the same way? Was every directive, instruction, or order obeyed without the least bit of dissent, discussion, comment, or question?

Originally Posted by Sigaba

Do you also believe that human beings are capable of "perfect" understanding of any topic?

Originally Posted by Sigaba

Do we know for a fact what over a billion Muslims are being taught?

We know what sharia law requires. We know our Constitution. And we know that they are incompatible. Starting with the binary answer required of the simple question: which is the supreme law of the land? Article VI of the Constitution says that it is. Sharia states that it is. Which is it?

There are many more, already discussed in the thread comparing the two.

Originally Posted by Sigaba

There are all the comparisons of Islamic theology to Nazism. Yet those who have devoted their professional careers to understanding the latter still don't know for certain what Nazism was about. This state of imperfect knowledge comes despite the fact that they scour the planet for any and all information that might help them piece the puzzle together.

We've got a good enough understanding to know that Nazism led to genocide. It was an evil ideology worthy of destruction by our "greatest generation."

Originally Posted by Sigaba

On the other hand, this wonderful cottage industry built by self describe experts on Islam rests on what? Blog posts linked to blog posts? Journalistic accounts taken off the internet? Google?

This "cottage industry" rests on what? It rests on the sharia itself. It rests on reading the black and white and knowing that the things those you dismiss are in fact right on track. How can someone say so with such surety?

Simple.

Read Hasan's slides. They're on the internet too.

Originally Posted by Sigaba

Where are the translations of sermons being delivered in mosques across the planet? Where are the transcripts of interviews and discussions in cafes, family rooms, farms, office buildings, and in chat rooms that show what a credible sample of Muslims really think, believe, and practice? Where are the field studies showing that the driving force in the Islamic world is Islam and not other factors such as gender, nationalism, politics (including the politics of religion), ethnicity, language, economics, age, psychology, culture, war, or even contingency?

We could show you all of those things and you would deny them too. Just as you'll deny the meaning of the word jihad. "Jihad means fighting. Nothing else." You know who said that? Not me. It was Osama Bin Laden's mentor - Abdullah Azzam. His credentials? He was taught islamic jurisprudence at al-azar university. You can't have a stronger pedigree than that.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/securi...llah_azzam.htm

Originally Posted by Sigaba

IMO, the only thing she's exposing is her own egoism (the name of her blog is instructive, albeit not in the way she'd like) and her utterly abysmal understanding of the history of American strategic culture.

Meanwhile, she's deflecting attention and inquiry from where either would better serve her professed interest--figuring out why her message does not and finding more effective ways to communicate.

Then again, that would require her to put down her megaphone, climb down from the soap box, step out the limelight, and maybe do the kind of research, analysis, and communicating that is going to resonate with people other than those who already agree with her.

But she's obviously too important to the cause to do anything of the kind. And what would be the point? She already has a perfect understanding of exactly what over a billion people already think.

She's got a much better understanding of the issues than most in America - especially those who would willfully blind themselves to the facts.

[T-Rock]

Where are the translations of sermons being delivered in mosques across the planet?

A good start would be here:
http://www.memritv.org/content/en/tv_channels.htm

The following man is a Kuwaiti educator, a professor (Abdallah Nafisi); he is giving a public lecture. From this we can conclude that the attendees support him, and that all the organizers of the event support him. His 'lecture' was broadcast on television so can't we conclude that the producers, the owners, and other stakeholders in the station tolerate his words as acceptable? Isn't this especially significant as it is no small thing to arrange public broadcasting of an event on Arabic TV?
We don't see millions of Muslims around the world in mass street demonstrations saying that they desagree with him... do we?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M32M-2B2mz8
(Note the demeanor and reaction of his audience)

On the other hand, this wonderful cottage industry built by self describe experts on Islam rests on what?

The Koran, the Hadith (the traditions of Mohammed) and his biography, the Sira - since it determines how we, the Kafir, are defined and treated.
http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/c.../muslim/quran/
http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/c...muslim/hadith/
http://www.islamonline.net/IOL-English/info/hadith.asp

Do we know for a fact what over a billion Muslims are being taught?

Actions speak louder than words...

[Warrior-Mentor]

Expanding on Sigaba's "cottage industry" concept, there's not enough money to do something that includes death threats to the author and their family. And the predictable threat or lawsuits hardly makes this a profitable endeavor.

[dr. mabuse]

Thank you Warrior-Mentor.