27 thoughts on ““If a Jew is Hiding, Go There and Kill Him!””

1. So now, the spotfire grows!

2. Islam fits, like a glove, the definition of extremism in the UK’s “Prevent” strategy. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/97976/prevent-strategy-review.pdf
   Because Islam mandates violence against other religions it qualifies as “violent extremism”, the very phenomenon that the strategy aims to “Prevent”.
   Theresa May, though, manages to “prevent” any action by her pre-formed judgment:
   “the ideology of extremism and terrorism is the problem;
   legitimate religious belief emphatically is not” (“Prevent” strategy foreword).
   http://libertygb.org.uk/v1/index.php/home/root/news-libertygb/6183-extremism-there-is-a-problem-within-islam

   • Don’t forget the death penalty officially prescribed, in orthodox Islamic law, for anyone who leaves the cult. Even the Scientologists don’t go that far.

     • Some honest imam or other admitted the mosques would empty PDQ if “Death to Apostates” wasn’t a main driver of devotion.

       Have you read Kohlberg’s stages of moral development?

       http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kohlberg%27s_stages_of_moral_development

       He was the earliest (after Piaget) academic to focus on our successive stages in moral development. The feminist academics didn’t like him, but I can’t remember why. They were a thin-skinned bunch.

       Anyway, I’d place Islam’s methods, prayers, and practices at the very early stage…Level 1, Stage i – avoidance of punishment. That is very clear in Hirsi Ali’s autobiography, though she may have moved partly to the “good little girl” , Level 2 Stage iii.

       Individually, perhaps some Muslims move up into the higher stages, but that would be individual accomplishment and would require the maturity to handle moral ambiguity. Not something the regular course of their religion would encourage.

       • “Some honest imam or other admitted the mosques would empty PDQ if “Death to Apostates” wasn’t a main driver of devotion.”

         Yesterday I mentioned this, probably on another website, and noted the astonishing fact that few Muslims seem to be embarrassed that their creed has depended so much on force and brutality to get people into the fold and keep them in. On the contrary, many seem quite proud of their readiness to apply force and brutality for the sake of Islam.

         • Why be astonished? Muslims are diseased with a degree of fanaticism that makes it perfectly logical they value certain precepts (defense of Islam, sanctity of Muhammad’s person) above life and meriting capital punishment.

           Until we get this through our heads, we will continue to underestimate the danger of Islam.

           For more on the textual sources of Islam’s view on apostasy:

           http://www.answering-islam.org/Silas/apostasy.htm

     • About Scientology: having known two ex-Sc, I would say they were fearful of any active practictioners knowing their where-abouts or hearing about their having left the fold. You have to make careful plans to move and then hope no one leaves venomous snakes in your mailbox.,

       • Ah, so I should have taken my tongue out of my cheek.

3. We are so bound by the cultural idea that religion is ‘good’ that we apply the meme to all religions without thinking, but we also know from hard experience that ‘political’ movements (religions) can be profoundly evil.

   We are therefore irrational when it comes to Islam.

   “However stupid, contrary to fact and unsound it may be to sweepingly indict all the individual adherents of any religion of racism, xenophobia or a propensity to violence”

   Now substitute “Nazism” in the above sentence, and you will see the error and irrationality of our blindness.

   The effect of Islam on the world has been entirely negative, but we find it very difficult to put voice to this fact because our cultural instinct is to assume an inherant benevolence behind anything labelled ‘religion’, this is not the case, and the biggest victims of Islam are those born into it, especially those without a heterosexual male orientation.

   • “We are so bound by the cultural idea that religion is ‘good’ that we apply the meme to all religions without thinking,”

     That’s an error made by many Christians in our ecumenical age: “They believe in God; they pray; they try to be modest; etc. — That’s all good, isn’t it?”

     Christians with theology degrees might make an extra effort to highlight the nice, spiritual elements in Islam, and then package that part as the real religion in a somewhat circular process: religion is good, therefore the religion of Islam is good, therefore the good parts of Islam are the real religion of Islam, and whatever is bad is a perversion.

     Recently, some military guys were talking with Sean Hannity about their first-hand experience of the evil inspired by Islam. One guy in particular made it plain that he saw Islam period as the problem, and Hannity kept coming back to the “hijacked” notion: “If my religion were being hijacked, I would speak out!” he said, right after a clear statement to the effect that hijacking of Islam is not what’s going on. (Maybe Hannity feels compelled to take that stance because of Saudi shares in Fox, but lots of influential people still see things that way.)

     • It’s not just Christians with theology degrees that try harder. In fact, Sean Hannity is a case in point: he’s a devout Catholic and his parish is important to him (or it was when I had occasion to listen. I doubt he’s changed much in that regard). Hannity wants to think well of people until they prove to be umm…”compromised”, perhaps? He’s one of those folks who just wants everyone to get along…except that he thinks liberal actions are hurting the country.

       If you could dig up Osama bin Laden, Hannity would have him on the show to question him closely and to complain to him that he “hijacked” a peaceful religion. IOW, Hannity knows what he knows and only a bummed IED upside the head would change anything. Even then, he’d be sure it was one of those putative hijackers.

       • “It makes me wonder whether Abdel-Samad’s greatest sin against Islam was not the powerful description of its totalitarian qualities…”

         Abdel-Samad doesn’t condemn Islam; he only condemns its “hijacking”. Just because he has a death fatwa hanging over his head, does not make him our ally. He is still diseased by the Islam that is punishing him.

     • I have a Masters in Divinity from a conservative Protestant school, and I will not make the effort to find the “nice spiritual stuff” in Islam. Jesus Christ is the Way, Truth, and Life; and a religion whose holy books say he was merely man and did not really die on the cross cannot be true, but something that leads people to Hell.

       This being said, I cannot to save my life find a passage in the New Testament that commands me to hasten anyone on his way to Hell. On the contrary, I learn that God, in His mercy, sent witnesses to turn me away from that path. Maybe He’ll similarly bless my poor efforts to do the same for others.

4. Most of nazis never killed a Jew nor worked in a Concentration Camp.

   I wonder what would happen if somebody said that Nazism is not really a hate ideology, that the problem were that there were some “Radical Nazis” but most of Nazis were indeed moderate.

   Just wonder.

5. Zeman can be understood in no other way than this: It is not the radical Islamism of a couple of screwballs with explosives that is the problem. Islam per se tends toward racism and anti-Semitism, and so — even if indirectly — is the basis for violence and terror.

   Eureka!

6. Finally, twelve and a half years late … someone is talking sense.

7. Religion is of its very nature highly subject to interpretation. Oracles spoke in delphic mysteries. Prophets were misunderstood. Parables aren’t even meant to be taken at face value and only at face value.

   Even in mathematics, theorems do not tell the whole story. He who would truly understand must delve into the proof and then explore related situations. The human mind doesn’t work like a program, not even in those realms of thinking at the opposite pole to religion.

   Islam cannot be an exception to this universal rule. The verse about killing Jews has toxic consequences, but there are interpretations which assign to it “end-time” significance rather than being a standing instruction such as the five prayer times of the day. So—since there is wiggle room in the text, what men do with the text will be contingent. Imams, mullahs, authorities of great or just local sway—these are the human beings who must share responsibility for what happens as a result of that verse.

   The verse itself is not an unambiguous command to go forth and massacre whenever possible. It’s not even taken that way by most Muslims.

   • “It’s not even taken that way by most Muslims.”

     How in the world do you propose to know this?

     Do you have a magic Muslim-mind reading machine?

     Does said machine work in the past, present, and future?

   • It’s taken that way by enough Muslims to cause a lot of trouble; and those who act directly on it are very unlikely to be the only people who take it that way. There is plenty of evidence that a seething, irrational hatred of Jews is extremely common among Muslims, regardless of whether that particular surah has interpretive “wiggle room.”

   • Religion subject to interpretation? Yes, the Bible can be made to say whatever you want–provided you are unscrupulous enough.

     The US Constitution is even more of a rubber nose.

     • The infusion of Protestantism into Christianity in the modern West where the West did NOT actively persecute people for straying from religious doctrine has confused Westerners to falsely believe that religion is ‘open to interpretation’ in other non-Western parts of the world – and that government is ‘open to interpretation’ in any part of the world. The idea that – even Western – religions and governments will NOT actively persecute people who stray from doctrine is being shown every day now to be false.

   • The fact that the majority of Muslims are better than their religion should not blind us to the horrors of their religion. The straight-forward interpretation is accepted by most Muslims. Most don’t follow it to the letter (and from the point of view of their religion they don’t have to) but they support those who do attempt to follow it to the letter.

8. “The verse itself is not an unambiguous command to go forth and massacre whenever possible. It’s not even taken that way by most Muslims.”
   It does not matter: we know not every German killed Jews and gypsies. But we know what happened. Not every German hurled rockets at London. Not every German hated Paris and Moscow.
   Today not every Sunni Saudi Wahhabi is going to Nigeria, Kenya, Syria, Iraq, Sri Lanka, The Phillipines, Thailand, Indonesia . . . but that does not matter. Not every Muslim in Britain participated in London Bombings.
   But we also know that Ottoman Empire forced not only every Muslim to kill Europeans and Viennese, but also forced what had remained of the Christians in their vast satanic empire to go kill Europeans.

9. Islamonausea sums it up.

10. I have read some individual accounts by enlisted members of the Wehrmacht of their experiences on the Eastern Front. They struck me as individuals with normal patriotic feelings. One joined the army to escape rural life and seek adventure not to join the Gestapo. Another man and his friends were ordered to execute some Italian civilians in their custody and instead marched them out of sight, shot into the ground, and motioned for the Italians to escape. (For an account of how American troops treated German POWs read Company Commander.)

    Soviet soldiers served an even more monstrous regime but there is no effort to portray them as complicit in the crimes of their government.

    Even in the U.S., which is vastly different from Germany of the 1930s, we have a Dept. of Homeland Security that is procuring huge quantities of hollow point ammunition. If one thinks that individual Germans were complicit in the crimes of their government, consider that even inquiring of DHS what the purpose of that procurement is will likely land one on a list of suspicious malcontents anti-government militia extremists. The same respecting the same kind of disturbing buys by the Post Office and the Social Security Administration. (Up next: M1 Abrams tanks for the Bureau of Mine Safety.) Then consider how a citizen might prevent such stockpiling or even ensure that there are meaningful restrictions imposed on local jurisdictions’ use of military armored vehicles and SWAT teams to serve warrants on jaywalkers and people with overdue library books.

    There is a huge disconnect here between citizens and the political class on the issue of immigration. I hereby attest that ruling-clique policies to keep our borders open at all costs are not mine.

    That said, Islamic doctrine and practice are interpreted and enforced by men who are simply uncivilized, fanatical, and uniformly dedicated to the subjugation or death of infidels. Any deviation from the party line is treated “blasphemy” (including enmity or hatred towards Mohammed or simply Muslims), “apostasy” (including supporting more moderate forms of Islam), “interpretation,” “heresy,” “spreading mischief,” or “polytheism.” The individual Muslim may not be complicit but he risks his very life to question any “doctrine” or instance of jihad. Not to mention that the reach of the mullahs extends to the most intimate details of daily life. Resistance to their directions is blasphemy and thus dangerous in the extreme.

    And, clearly, there is widespread community support for honor killings and extra-legal killing for blasphemy and apostasy, notwithstanding individual moral giants. It’s an all-encompassing system that is a “perfect closed system” as the Baron has written, one that’s been successfully maintained for 1400 years, unlike the 13-year life of National Socialist Germany. I dare say that there was relatively little pressure to join the Party in Germany and that all that was required of most was compliance. Islam requires much more that mere acquiescence, though I grant that deviation from the party line in the Soviet Union or National Socialist Germany. Even in those places, extra-judicial killings by mere citizens was not national policy.

    Islam is a vicious, satanic political system which will ensnare all Muslims, regardless of their individual disdain for it.

    If any.

    Serious opposition will be punished by murder. For whatever reason, moderates and non-jihadis who are content to live under our laws (surely itself an instance of blasphemy) are and have been useless and irrelevant in the fight to defeat Islam. Where Islam is, there is subversion, treachery, killing, and contumacy. Islam is hugely successful in being Islamic and thus, wherever Islam is, there is a mortal threat to the West or any non-Islamic country. It’s baked in the cake. 1,400 years of experience with Islam ought to have taught us something by now.

    • . . . though I grant that deviation from the party line in the Soviet Union or National Socialist Germany was not tolerated and extremely dangerous.

11. ‘It makes me wonder whether Abdel-Samad’s greatest sin against Islam was not the powerful description of its totalitarian qualities, but the creation of a motto of equal and opposite power.’

    I associate the term ‘quality’ with positivity, goodness, excellence, virtue, etc. I’m unaware of any aspect of islam to which I would associate the noun ‘quality’, as commonly understood in the western mainstream vernacular. While your usage is technically correct I prefer to attribute islam with descriptors such as ‘characteristic’, ‘property’, ‘feature’, etc., lest we give the impression there is something positive about the ideology.

Comments are closed.