The Second Crusade

There is something that I have been setting up to address by posting some of the recent material on subjects like Occam’s Razor and Immanuel Kant.

We do conduct a heavy criticism of Islamic terrorism here – and we attack it from all angles. It typically generates responses like these gleaned from actual comments:

[You are] fomenting [Christian] jihad, there is nothing you and B want more than to have a good reason to kill Muslims. You are sick and pathetic people.

…you and your pseudo-religious ilk are the brown-shirts, and the Muslims are the Jews. If anyone is going to do any rounding up of citizens, it will nativistic thugs herding Muslims into camps, and women suspected of having abortions being forced to undergo medical exams to prove their innocence.

So having been accused of action tantamount to murder or genocide, I feel compelled to respond.

I don’t hate Muslims. I have noted before that one of my best friends (who gave me a Koran as a personal gift) is a Persian Muslim. I am; however, a Christian and I believe that means that we each are free agents to decide for ourselves what to believe and that if a particular theology (or none at all) gives you peace and comfort in your life, it is not my place to judge you. Where I separate from that position is when there is an attempt by a third party to denigrate my faith, attack me only because of what I believe, force me to act in accordance with their beliefs, cause me to alter my life to accommodate (or avoid) their actions – or in the case of terrorism, put me or my family at risk.

The “You Believe That All Muslims Are Terrorists” Lie

I get this one all the time because we are clear here that there is violence inherent in the Quran.

If there are 100 Southern Baptists in a room and one of them goes out and kills someone for the glory of the First Baptist Church of New Albany, Mississippi because the Old Testament told him to, that does not mean that the other 99 are guilty because they are Baptists, too. But what it does mean is that Baptist theology is still the reason that the one did kill and the fact that 99 didn’t does not change that fact.

If I commit a crime because the Old Testament tells me to strike down my enemies and I am pissed off at the power company for charging me too much, the “and” in that statement still means that the Old Testament is a reason I did it. I don’t get to separate the two.

The “Muslims Hate America” Lie

I don’t believe this. There are too many Muslim-Americans who are Americans first.

Most of the time when I hear this, is coming out the pie-hole of an appeaser or a “Blame America Firster”. This isn’t fact based; actually it is an example of narcissism. To think that everything that causes terrorism is somehow uniquely American is the height of arrogance and patently wrong. Narcissism isn’t just thinking that good things are all about you; it is thinking that ALL things are about you. The desire to always accept blame for things that are not attributable to you is simply another way to call attention to yourself, to keep yourself as the center of attention.

The “Muslims Hate The West Because We Are Rich”

I don’t believe this either. Evidence of the West is all over Islamic countries – some of the favorite brands in these countries are McDonald’s and KFC – and you can’t get much more “western” than that. People are still standing line at our embassies to get visas to come to the US and outmigration to the UK and EU is massive.

It Is Our Fault Because Islam Is The Religion Of Peace

But here is what I do know – from the 7th century until the 1900’s, you would be hard pressed to find anyone who would describe it as that. From the time of expansions of the Ottoman Empire and the Caliphates of history to the Armenian Genocide, Islam had been recognized as a savage, tribal, war mongering cult.

Islam is being used as a reason to attack Muslims and non-Muslims alike. This is an unassailable fact and the one that causes the most problems for the Islamic apologists.

The reason that you don’t hear more about it is that sectarian killings between Sunni, Shia and Sufi Muslim sects completely negates the argument that the terrorism occurs because of Christian oppression, presence of the US military, Israel, poverty, Coca-Cola, apple pie, global consumerism, oil, bad cinematography, when there are fights between Islamic sects that are based on the same tenets that causes them to attack us – and it is that the insufficiently Muslim – i.e. Jews, Christians, Hindu, Buddhist, atheist…and apparently any of the Sufi, Shia or Sunni depending on which sect you belong to…that should be exterminated there is a common thread.

Hating America is a cheap and easy answer but how does that explain on Muslim killing another? If Muslims hate the “west”, then why have they been killing each other since the 7th century, hundreds of years before there was even a “west”?

When sects of the same Islamic religion kill each other for the same reasons that they kill non-Muslims, it is pure logic to deduce that it is due to the religion itself. As in the “Baptist” example above, there may well be additional reasons de jour, but additional reasons do not excuse that Islam is at the core.

I’ve posted before what Kant wrote:

If one cannot prove that a thing is, he may try to prove that it is not. And if he succeeds in doing neither (as often occurs), he may still ask whether it is in his interest to accept one or the other of the alternatives hypothetically, from the theoretical or the practical point of view. Hence the question no longer is as to whether perpetual peace is a real thing or not a real thing, or as to whether we may not be deceiving ourselves when we adopt the former alternative, but we must act on the supposition of its being real.

Taken with Occam’s Razor:

When you have two competing theories that make exactly the same predictions, the simpler one is the better.

…when applied to Islamic terror, renders a specific synthesis.

Specifically, we can all agree that we have experienced terrorist attacks in America and while there have been non-Muslim domestic terror attacks (going back to bombings and violence by the Weather Underground, the Black Panthers and groups like the Symbionese Liberation Army), both Muslim and non-Muslim attacks have been based on some ideology.

If, in Islam there is no political ideology because there is nothing but serving Allah and Muslims recognize no other earthly authority, does that not mean that in this case, ideology and theology are one and the same?

If that is true, then does it also not follow that attacks on both Muslim non-Muslim targets – like a majority Christian nation like America – would be motivated by the struggle for ideological/theological supremacy of Islam over Christianity and/or one particular brand of Islam over another?

People have attempted to explain by thousands of different, yet illegitimate, reasons but the synthesis of Kantian philosophy and Occam’s Razor is this:

If we know by evidence that Islamic teachings can (but not always) indicate that it is the root cause of terrorism, and this is the most simple of deductions, should we not recognize that it is a danger to Muslim and non-Muslim alike…and if so should we not be actively fighting it together?

There will never be an end to this until Islam joins with the other religions in conversion by the heart instead of the sword and together we stand against radical fundamentalism. Until that happens, Islam and fair-minded Muslims are in the unenviable position of aiding and abetting religious terrorism.

As Bill Shakespeare would say:

Aye, there’s the rub.

15 thoughts on “The Second Crusade

  1. It appears believers in Islam, think themselves above “others”, and find it a requirement to convert, subjugate, or destroy all those who; do not agree with them / believe as they do.

    Where are the claimed “non-radical” muslims? Why are non-radical muslims not forcibly stopping the “radicals” from murdering in the name of Jihad?

    Assume the estimate of “only” 10 % of all muslims are “radical”. Assume the estimates of are 1-1.2 billion muslims worldwide. That’s at least 100 million terrorists actively supporting Jihad.

    What number is “too many” murdered, before the “victim class” accept reality?

    Boston Marathon Bombing, British soldier beheading in the streets while people video record with their phones, Fort Hood Doctor murdering co-workers, 100’s of muslim women and children blown up in the streets of their Iraq. . .

    Is this Islam’s nature?

  2. “There will never be an end to this until Islam joins with the other religions in conversion by the heart instead of the sword and together we stand against radical fundamentalism. Until that happens, Islam and fair-minded Muslims are in the unenviable position of aiding and abetting religious terrorism.”


    I am asking this politely, and with sincere interest in your answer. If what you call for in the section I quoted from your post ever happens, will you still have Islam, or will you have created a whole new religion?

    • “Ooh ooh ooh” jumping up and down in his seat, waving his hand, “I know, I know, pick me”

    • Joe,

      You have said something I have been thinking for a long time. The mohameddans scream up and down how “Peaceful” they are etc…. Murder is not the islamic way etc….. in spite of the Clear Directives from the koran which Explicity call for killing , cheating and lying to nonbelievers……One wonders if these “moderate…America-First….Peaceful ” muslims aren’t engaging in Taqqiya and Kitman ( are Lying to give false impressions) then Why wouldn’t they become part of a Religion that DOES preach Peace ?? To Hear these “Good America Moderate muslims” you’d think they were describing Christianity or Buddhism or Taoism……

      You know any number of Faiths their “book” tells them to kill…….behing rocks or otherwise…..

  3. “There will never be an end to this until Islam joins with the other religions in conversion by the heart instead of the sword and together we stand against radical fundamentalism. Until that happens, Islam and fair-minded Muslims are in the unenviable position of aiding and abetting religious terrorism.”

    I would rephrase this. It’s like saying, you are guilty by association until everyone who shares your faith learns to act right. It would be simpler to just make the distinction between those who convert by the heart from those who convert by the sword, and then treat them accordingly. We could aid the pursuit of justice now without having to wait for a miracle.

    • Really Justin…….really….to quote you…”It’s like saying, you are guilty by association until everyone who shares your faith learns to act right. ”

      You mean like the 911 and other attacks on American Citizens cause they were guilty by association with the Desert Storm soldiers…….and all the muslims dancing in the streets after the attacks…..and the DEAFENING silence by “Good America-first mohameddans” after 911 and virtualy EVERY SINGLE OTHER terrorist attack since ????

      • like every other terrorist attack (on Anerica) since the 1780’s-1790’s …
        On Christendom? Oh that would be since the 7th century …

    • @Justin: That is completely the opposite of what I said.

      I’ll answer two questions at once, Joe’s and yours.

      There are several big differences in Christianity and Islam:

      Christians see the Bible as being inspired by God but written by men, Muslims see the Koran as the literal word of Allah, handed directly to Mohammed.

      Christianity has undergone two major reformations, one when God and the Israelites entered into the New Covenant and again in 1517 when Martin Luther and other self-described “reformers”, who objected to (“protested”) the doctrines, rituals, leadership and ecclesiastical structure of the Roman Catholic Church, created a movement that led to the creation of new national Protestant churches.

      It is an open question whether such a reformation is possible in Islam.

      I am saying that there is “guilt by association”. You can’t tell a murderer from a tax cheat from a guy who shoplifted a magazine by just looking at them as they pass by you on the street…but I can deduce that if the guy is a member of the Crips, he is far more likely to be a danger to me than a guy who is a member of the local PTA even if I have no personal knowledge of his criminal history – the fact that he is a member of the Crips has some meaning because we know what it takes to qualify for membership.

      Justin, until you can walk down any street in Pakistan, Afghanistan, London or New York and point out which Muslim is going to randomly kill for Allah, then yes, I am afraid it is guilt by association. The Boston Bombers were not wearing anything that says “I’m here to kill you”, nor were the two murderers in London. There is no way to cull out the radical killers because they consciously use anonymity as camouflage and average people for shields, hiding in plain sight as it were.

      By your logic, Justin, we should ban all gang task forces and organized crime units because we don’t know exactly what individual member of a gang or the mafia will do the crime even though we know that gangs and the mafia are engaged in on-going criminal activity. We do this kind of criminal prevention work all the time – the only reason we are not doing it here is that we are afraid to publicly state that Islam is the unifying reason for the gang…Hell, the FBI maintains a standing task force for religious cults – did you know that in 1999, the FBI reported on Project Megiddo? Megiddo was a report researched and written by the United States’ Federal Bureau of Investigation under Director Louis Freeh. Released on October 20, 1999, the report named followers of white supremacy, Christian Identity, the militia movement, Black Hebrew Israelites, and apocalyptic cults as potential terrorists who might become violent in reaction to the new millennium.

      Not a Muslim single threat mentioned in this report, only potential threats from Christian fundamentalists. Since this was this considered a legitimate effort event though Judeo-Christian belief were the common thread, yet to do the same with Islam is “guilt by association”? Why is it legitimate, as Joe has pointed out, for Janet Napolitano tag Christian groups as potential domestic terrorism suspects and not have every mosque in America on that list? Isn’t that “guilt by association”?

      Joe: I do believe that it will have to be a different religion in the sense that today’s Christianity is different from Old Testament to New Testament to post-Protestant Reformation Christianity.

      • Utah, just an edit suggestion, as this sentence carries tremendous weight, and needs to resonate ….

        There is no way to cull out the radical killers because they consciously use anonymity as camouflage and average people for shields, hiding in plain sight as it were.

        Bold it, and it is sad we cannot add color to the letters.

  4. I am Curious what your Persian friend would think if you gave HIM a Holy Bible …… as a “Gift”.

    Now. I’m not asking that rhetorically……and in fact this may already have occured …. but, well to me, the Gesture rings a bit hollow if unsolicited.

  5. I support with the Utahn view, except the statement that got special emphasis.

    “There is no way to cull out the radical killers because they consciously use anonymity as camouflage and average people for shields, hiding in plain sight as it were.”

    I agree with the second part, that terrorists use anonymity and camouflage. But to say there is no way to cull them out is just false. Good investigative work is not easy, especially with an inept executive branch blinded by political correctness, but there is a way; there are many ways. Utah makes the distinction between the PTA member versus the Crips gang member. The same kinds of distinctions can be made within the Muslim community. There are mosques that promote terror, and there are those that promote peace. That is one of many logical starting points for distinguishing civil Muslims from dangerous ones.

    But, as Utah pointed out, we have corruption in our administration dating back decades that is affecting the investigative agencies, reaching new levels of absurdity with the latest IRS scandal. Political foes receive undue scrutiny while pathetically little progress has been made in the Benghazi investigation. How bad is it? Likely terrorists are being considered as allies in the Syrian conflict. What more need I say? The government has disembarked from its moorings.

    But just because the government has lost its senses does not mean we need to react with an equal and opposite lack of discrimination. As Don Ameche points out, crowds of Muslims frequently rejoice at America’s misfortune. My only question is, how many are not rejoicing? Are these demonstrations the equivalent of Occupy demonstrations in America, representative of just a fraction of society? Or is anti-Americanism far more prevalent among Muslims? How many Muslims are indifferent or supportive of America’s fate? I have no idea.

    Let’s suppose it’s majority against America. I have my doubts, but let’s suppose. As an Islamic terrorist, isn’t part of the intent to exacerbate the divide between east and west, in hopes that the conflict speeds the fall of western society? Isn’t it in the terrorist’s best interest for westerners to arrive at the conclusion that all Muslims are the enemy? Wouldn’t that virtually guarantee that no cooperation would be provided from the Muslim community, and terrorists would reign free? Bear in mind it was cooperation from a Pakistani that led to the killing of Osama bin Laden. Likewise, it was partly Susan Rice’s blatant contradiction of the Libyan president that stalled the Benghazi investigation, according to the Hicks testimony.

    I suppose a likely rebuttal is that accepting civil Muslims into society simply prolongs the inevitable, that civility is just an act and when the time is right they will show their true colors and annihilate us. I have my doubts, mainly because I see so many Muslims struggling against unjust authorities in pursuit of civility. I think those people deserve a chance to prove themselves.

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.