Danielpipes.org - Submitted by Prof. Paul Eidelberg (Israel), Jun 19, 2008
With all due respect to Daniel Pipes, and although I understand his reticence, it is not sufficient to classify the enemy as "Islamism." Islamism is nothing less than Islam. The Quran, the Hadith, and Islam's murderous history make this crystal clear. But consider the judgment of two astute scholar-statesmen of uncommon urbanity:
Alexis de Tocqueville:
I studied the Quran a great deal. I came away from that study with the conviction that by and large there have been few religions in the world as deadly to men as that of Muhammad. So far as I can see, it is the principal cause of the decadence so visible today in the Muslim world and, though less absurd than the polytheism of old, its social and political tendencies are in my opinion more to be feared, and I therefore regard it as a form of decadence rather than a form of progress in relation to paganism itself.
Winston Churchill said as much in 1899, but with chilling significance for Europe today:
How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries, improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome. (Emphasis added.)
Unlike Americans and Europeans, Muslim leaders name their enemies. They call Christians the "Sunday people," and Jews the "Saturday people." Ahmadinejad of Iran calls for a world without the United States and Israel, meaning a world without Christianity and Judaism. The same murderous hatred is preached in innumerable mosques in the United States financed by Saudi Arabia.
Muslims do not speak of "moderate" Christians or of "moderate" Jews—no more than we ever spoke of "moderate" Nazis.
Intellectually liberated Muslims like Nonie Darwish and Wafa Sultan are strategically irrelevant. Indeed, the more we appease the enemy by refraining from calling him by his true name, the more so-called moderate Muslims will manifest their violent Mohammedan heritage.
Even secular Muslims supported Saddam Hussein.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
With all due respect to Daniel Pipes, and although I understand his reticence, it is not sufficient to classify the enemy as "Islamism." Islamism is nothing less than Islam. The Quran, the Hadith, and Islam's murderous history make this crystal clear. But consider the judgment of two astute scholar-statesmen of uncommon urbanity:
Alexis de Tocqueville:
I studied the Quran a great deal. I came away from that study with the conviction that by and large there have been few religions in the world as deadly to men as that of Muhammad. So far as I can see, it is the principal cause of the decadence so visible today in the Muslim world and, though less absurd than the polytheism of old, its social and political tendencies are in my opinion more to be feared, and I therefore regard it as a form of decadence rather than a form of progress in relation to paganism itself.
Winston Churchill said as much in 1899, but with chilling significance for Europe today:
How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries, improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome. (Emphasis added.)
Unlike Americans and Europeans, Muslim leaders name their enemies. They call Christians the "Sunday people," and Jews the "Saturday people." Ahmadinejad of Iran calls for a world without the United States and Israel, meaning a world without Christianity and Judaism. The same murderous hatred is preached in innumerable mosques in the United States financed by Saudi Arabia.
Muslims do not speak of "moderate" Christians or of "moderate" Jews—no more than we ever spoke of "moderate" Nazis.
Intellectually liberated Muslims like Nonie Darwish and Wafa Sultan are strategically irrelevant. Indeed, the more we appease the enemy by refraining from calling him by his true name, the more so-called moderate Muslims will manifest their violent Mohammedan heritage.
Even secular Muslims supported Saddam Hussein.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment