Factual Persuasion: Can’t We All Just Get Along? (Part 2)

From WikiIslam, the online resource on Islam
Jump to: navigation, search
Factual Persuasion
Changing the Minds of Islam's Supporters
By: Dr. Bill Warner
Chapter 1: The Confusion of Islam
Chapter 2: Official Islam
Chapter 3: Can’t We All Just Get Along?
Chapter 3.5: Can’t We All Just Get Along? (Part 2)
Chapter 4: Shaping
Chapter 5: Example Cases
Chapter 5.5: Example Cases (Part 2)
Chapter 6: Refuting Official Islam
Chapter 7: Golden Age?
Chapter 8: A Case Study

Reform?[edit]

The magical thinking of many intellectuals is that Islam can be reformed, like Christianity and Judaism experienced. This sounds great.

Islam changes its ways and settles down to live among fellow humans. Only this will not work. It is impossible to reform Islam, because it was designed so it could not be reformed or changed.

Why do we want to reform Islam? Do we care if Muslims pray three times a day, instead of five times? No. The only reason we want reform is because of the violence against us. We do not want to reform the religion of Islam; we want to reform Political Islam.

The problems of reform[edit]

The Koran is perfect, complete and universal. The Koran says that Mohammed is the perfect model of a Muslim. The first problem is the perfection of the Trilogy—a perfect Koran and a perfect Sunna. How do you reform perfection? Why would Muslims want to improve perfection? If you take something out of the Koran, was the item you removed imperfect? If so, then the Koran was not perfect. Do you see the problem with reforming perfection?

The other problem with reformation is the amount of detail in the Sunna. The Sira is 800 pages long and Mohammed is on every page. Then there are the 6800 hadiths in Bukhari. The amount of Sunna is vast and covers the smallest detail, down to how many times to breathe when you drink a glass of water.

There is too much material for the doctrine to be reformed. For instance, 67% of Mohammed’s prophetic career is about jihad [Trilogy Text Devoted to Jihad]; it is not as if you can turn a blind eye to a few items and achieve reformation. Cutting out 67% of the Sira does not reform it, but creates an entire new text.

And Islam will never eliminate the one concept that has brought it success, jihad. All of Islam’s success has been based upon political submission, dualism and violence. What the Kafirs want changed is the violence, pressure, arguing and politics. Demanding the Kafirs’ submission and using violence works for Islam. The violence, pressure, arguments and demands are not going to stop because they have worked for 1400 years and are working better today than any time in the past.

The good Muslim[edit]

There is an attempt to make the problem of Islam go away. It is the “good Muslim” who will save the day. Everybody seems to know a “good Muslim” who is a friend at work.

What is a good Muslim? A good Muslim is one who seems non-violent. But that point of view is not Islamic. Islam is the one and only basis of determining what a good Muslim is. An apologist’s opinion of “good” is not relevant to anyone, except to the apologist and his friends. Islam says that a good Muslim is one who follows the Koran and the Sunna. That is the one and only criteria of being a good Muslim.

Apologists think that good Muslims are a proof of a “good” Islam and that the doctrine makes no difference. Oddly enough, Muslims do not agree with this. Muslims have one and only one definition of what a “good Muslim” is, one who has submitted to Islam and follows the Sunna. The cause is Islam; the effect is Muslim. Apologists think that Islam submits to Muslims, but apologists are ignorant, so they are free of facts, and in the soil of ignorance, any fantastic flower grows.

The problem in talking about Muslims as a group of people is that there are three kinds of Muslim. The first kind is the Meccan Muslim. A Meccan Muslim is primarily a religious person without the jihadic politics. A Medinan Muslim is a political Muslim. Then there is the Muslim who follows the Golden Rule, instead of Islamic ethics.

At this point a voice can be heard: “I know this Muslim and he is a good person. There are good Muslims.” Notice the shift from Islam to a person. Yes, he may be a good person, but that is different from being a good Muslim. His goodness is due to his following the Golden Rule and treating a Kafir as a human being.

A Golden Rule Muslim is one who is an apostate to some degree. Maybe the Golden Rule Muslim drinks beer or doesn’t go to the mosque. All Muslims have some Kafir in them. The Kafir civilization has much to offer: freedom, wealth, friendship, women who do not wear a bag for a garment and great entertainment. Some Muslims prefer Kafir civilization to Islamic civilization in many ways.

Since every Muslim can have three parts, it is hard to nail him down. There is a shifty quality that goes with the territory. Which center of gravity is he coming from? Is he religious, political, or friend? If religious or political, then he is not your friend, but a deceiver. But if he is your friend, then he is following the Golden Rule and is a Kafir. But how do you ever trust him? When is he Kafir? When is he Muslim?

Compromise[edit]

Tolerance always seeks some form of negotiated compromise. Both sides give a little and come up with a solution that both can live with. It tacitly assumes honest discussions and fairness. Tolerance also assumes equality between the persons, parties or groups. None of these criteria are met with any negotiations between Muslims and Kafirs. Islam has no compromises to make. Islam is perfect and has nothing to learn or adopt from Kafir civilization. The Islamic positions are perfect because they are based upon the Sunna of Mohammed. A compromise with Kafirs is a compromise with evil and ignorance.

Mohammed always pressed his neighbors for more and more accommodations, and in the end, he always got what he wanted. In the end, Mohammed achieved 100% of all of his demands. There was only one time he compromised. At a certain point in his career, Mohammed compromised with the polytheists and agreed that their gods had some power to guide. Then the Koran spoke against this idea and said that Satan had planted this idea (the Satanic verses). [This event was the basis of Salman Rusdie’s novel, The Satanic Verses. That novel won his a death fatwah.] It was the only error Mohammed ever made during his rise to complete power. He never compromised again.

Accommodation and submission has never worked with Islam—never. But that is the only solution we try and as a result, each day Kafirs become less free.

Why we lose[edit]

Islam has expanded since its first inception. We have decided to not oppose its growth, since that would be bigoted. In our present mind-set, there is nothing to stop Islam from prevailing. Europe is rapidly being overtaken by Muslim immigration and high birth rates. The problem is that Europe’s elites and governments are fully accommodated to the end of European civilization and the beginning of Eurabia. European media, intellectuals and government officials only want to help the process of the death of Europe by assisting Islam and yielding to all of Political Islam’s demands, including ever more welfare and immigration.

We agree to suspend the use of critical thinking and not study or critique Islam’s political doctrine. All of the thinking is done for us. Are you afraid of Islam? Accept the Official Islam of the apologists and you will feel better. We may have to make some accommodations for things like Sharia law, but we have a happy surrender.

Ignorance is the official political point-of-view. No one who actually knows anything about the doctrine or history of Political Islam is ever given a place at forums or discussions. Knowing the truth disqualifies you from commenting.

Ignorance means that in all of our dealings with Political Islam, we will always make a decision based upon our ethics and our world-view, so we will always make the wrong decision. A classic example was America’s “War on Terror”. We decided to mount a military campaign against an enemy we named as terrorists. We declared that Muslims were just like us and that we would accommodate all of their demands while we battled terrorists.

Knowledge about Islam would have meant that our first question would have been: who is the enemy? Since the enemy is Political Islam, it means that we should have fought an ideological war, not a military war.

An ideological war would have meant that eight years after 9/11, every American Kafir would have been taught who Mohammed was, about the message of the Koran and the fact that we were all Kafi rs. We would know how Sharia law contradicts every principle of our government. In short, by now we would know our enemy and what its nature is.

Instead, we find ways to blame ourselves for the problem of Political Islam. There are those mischievous jihadists, but they are not “real” Muslims. This form of self-loathing is supported by our ignorance in the realm of education. An audit of university curriculums shows that the following are not taught at any known public American university:

• The Tears of Jihad—the deaths of 270 million Kafirs over 1400 years
• The history of the dhimmi and dhimmitude
• The conquest of Christian/Hindu/Buddhist territory—Afghanistan, Pakistan, all the Silk Route countries, Turkey, Middle East, Egypt, North Africa and the rest of Africa
• How Sharia law impacts the lives of women
• The concept of the Kafir
• The Koran (in its entirety)
• The Sira (in its entirety)
• The Hadith (in its entirety)
• Islam’s dualistic ethics and logic are not examined in philosophy
• Islamic slavery

What is taught about Islam is that it is one of the great world religions and that the high point of human civilization was the Islamic Golden Age in Baghdad and in Moorish Spain. Islamic poetry, architecture, and the Arabic language are studied, as well as modern Arabic history are viewed through a lens of political science and as a reaction to Western colonialism. Islam is not taught as an empire of conquest. The spread of Islam is taught as a wonderful benefit for the conquered Kafirs. The university courses never teach about any suffering at the hands of Islam.

You can get a degree in Middle East studies, become a diplomat in the Middle East and never read the Koran, Sira or Hadith. You will read some selections from this Trilogy, but there will be no systemic study of it. If you edit out the Jew-hatred from Hitler’s Mein Kampf, then there is nothing offensive about it. In the same way, selective readings from the Koran, the Sira and Hadith can be very benign.

Since all of our responses are based upon official ignorance, our decisions are not based on reality and our plans fail. We lose to Islam once more.


Previous Previous - Can’t We All Just Get Along?            Shaping - Next Next