Comments on The cost of Islamophobia by Christian Zionist

Sully, as always, good comments.

I think CK has failed to understand the core point of Hirsi Ali, Spencer and company: Islam is not purely a religion but an amalgam of religion with an authoritarian ideology of expansionist, supra-governmental ambitions. In this, it distinguishes itself from all other religions: Christianity abandoned such ambitions in the centuries since the Englightenment; Judaism, Bahai, Hindutva, Jains, Confucians, and Buddhists never had such world-wide ambitions.

I do not think the world's 5 bilion kufr will adapt to the 1 billion Muslims; the adaptation will be the inverse, whether peacefully or not. But terming non-Muslims' justifiable wariness "Islamophobia" doesn't help.


"Well it’s not."

Well your four-word argument is not only thin, it's non-existent.

Islam has carried out over 15,471 religion-motivated terrorist attacks since 9/11 alone:

"Isn’t your agenda about getting the Jews to Convert?"

You've just shown your anti-Christian bigotry; I myself am closer to secular than to evangelist. But that doesn't prevent your making assumptions on the basis of your own prejudice. Nor does it prevent me from thinking Zionism deserves our support and the Jews deserve our protection.

The term "goo-goo genocidaires" seems to arise from Walter Russell Mead's analysis, whch differs substantially from CK's:

CK wrote: “Islamophobia” is a word for a form of collective prejudice based on irrationality.

And what if the "prejudice" is based on rationality?

Dismissing non-Islamic minorities' concerns as "Islamophobia" is the same morality as dismissing 1939 Polish concerns as "Germanophobia".

Should Taiwan's concerns be dismissed as "Sinophobia"?

Should black wariness of whites at any time in the past, be dismissed as "Caucaso-phobia"?

Finally, ask yourself why Hindu have integrated into the west - and built large temples in multiple western countries - with little friction. Because Hindutva poses no equivalent threat as Islam. And minimsing the Islamic/Islamist threat will not make it go away.

John wrote:

"I also think another important trend is a movement of Muslims in the West away from any serious interest in religion and a desire for a secular lifestyle. But by its very nature, this is a largely hidden movement that makes very little claim on the future of Islam and Muslims. And it’s difficult for me to see many signs of significant new movements for a liberal Islam, constituting a full religious discipline, that are rooted specifically in the movement of Muslims to the West. This exists to some extent among Ismailis but I’m not sure how far it goes."

John is spot on in all respects.
In fact the (violent) reaction of Islam to Hirsi Ali or Irshad Manji proves John's contentions and disproves CK's.

I have just posted a few links to the repeated genocidal statements emanating from Islam. Let's see if this site has the moral fibre to publish them, or if comment is restricted to a single Weltanschuung.

Fuster, in several centuries of contact with modernity, change has not arrived to Islam, and won't without help.

MacLeod, the language has not changed.

"This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades". - Azzam Pasha

"If they [the Jews] all gather in Israel it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide" - Hassan Nasrallah

"Death to Jews" - Hamas

UCSD student and Hezbollah supporter supports genocide of Jews

"Khaibar Khaibar o Jews" - Gaza Flotilla

You'll have to do better than repeatedly calling me a liar, if you wish to gain any credibility with the people most threatened by Islam; they see you much like the naives the communists termed "useful idiots" in the west.

Incidentally, there should be more concern about the fact that Islam is gradually cleansing the Mideast of Maronites and Assyrians; there's more than one way to "eliminate" minorities.

CK MacLeod

"There’s a difference between a genocide and unconventional warfare or war crimes. Blurring the difference is a cheapening, dangerously self-undermining self-betrayal for Jews and friends of the Jews."

More foolishness.

I forwarded this link to a circle in Israel. They all - from left-most to right-most, including an Israeli Arab - responded that you are not only naive but dangerously so; one used the term "goo-goo genocidaire."

As I said, half of Jewish Israelis are refugees from 14 centuries of life under Islam, and they have too much first-hand contact to take your assertions seriously.

John #68 11:26am very good coment.

The naive aspect of this article is the intent to treat Islam as a religion. But Islam is not solely a releligion; it is religion amalgamated with an authoritarian, expansionist, aggressive, intolerant, imperialist, triumphalist political philosophy.

Thus "Islamophobia" as as warranted and necessary as anti-communism, with the caveat that the easiest and perhaps only way to win the war, is to apply maximum pressure to the Islamic world to begin its own internal Englightenment (as did Christianity), for its own good.

Sully #43 @8.14am

You make very good points. Also, consider that Iran's intent may be to use nuclear not as such, but as an intimidation factor to limit Israeli conventional self-defense and render it vulnerable to a "final solution" by Iran's proxies (Hizbullah, Hamas).

That's why the concerted Iranian-Syrian-Turkish effort to get heavy arms to Hizbullah and Hamas.


"It’s clear that Hezbollah is not, strictly speaking, a genocidally anti-Jewish organization."

I've never heard anything so naive in my entire life.

Do you really think the only people who want to murder all Jews, come out and say so explicitly? And do you think by denying the obvious, you encourage Israelis to listen?

Fully half of Jewish Israelis are of Mizrahi descent, and have learnt over centuries that the least challenge to Islamic dominance brought restrictions, pogroms, or even death.

Now the Jews have challenged Islamic dominance big-time, and know quite well the response will be genocidal. Or are they supposed to ignore the long history of statements like Azzam Pasha's ("a momentous massacre") or the thousands in Muslim capitals over the past half-century chanting, "Itbach al yahud"?

By splitting hairs you marginalise yourself; Israel would, and should, ignore those who take your line.