Faith, fanaticism and fantasy in the Middle East

Preface by Michael Diamond, Toronto.
I cannot know whether Obama is willfully hurting the US through his actions, or is doing so simply because he has a worldview which defies logic and ignores facts.

Take the latest utterances- a well crafted speech about ISIS and the need to confront it, with conditions, which includes a comment that ISIS is not Islamic.

So let me get this straight.  This man, elected as the leader of the most powerful country in the world by alot of people who he clearly took for a ride (and still does in a lot of cases) does not think that an organization that calls itself Islamic, and identifies as being Islamic, is in fact Islamic.  That is bizarre thinking, even before you examine Islam more closely.

In fact, if you do you will learn that everything these barbarians do is mandated in the Koran by the Prophet. And there is no room for interpretation- its very clear. As Clifford may states in his article below, what these people are is fundamentalists- in the Jewish religion, we might call them ultra-orthodox- people who interpret the scriptures by the letter.  However there is a difference here- the ultra – orthodox do not go around killing people, beheading, forcing conversions, mutilating bodies, etc because that is not what the Torah prescribes.

A fundamentalist in Judaism is not dangerous because his mandate is not dangerous.  A fundamentalist Muslim is absolutely dangerous because the Koran makes him or her that way through what it says.  And the Koran is really quite clever about how it generates opportunities for Muslims to become quite dangerous- because you are expected to die for Islam, and when you do, you are rewarded in the afterlife.  suicide bombing is a very popular activity in the Muslim world relative to other worlds because it generates a positive outcome- a wonderful afterlife with virgins etc.

So I would say the non fundamentalist Muslims and the rest of us have a serious problem.  Experts suggest that somewhere between 10 and 15% of Muslims are radicalized- to use May’s term, they are fundamentalists.  And while that is a minority, the numbers are staggering- 100 million plus people who are trying to kill us, unless we convert to Islam.  That is their role in life.  That is what the Koran requires them to do.  They believe it and they act on it.

And what are we doing about it in the West?  Other than in a few small circles of concern, nothing really.  There is concern about the 100-200 crazies from North America who are radicalized fighters in ISIS right now who right now have the legal right to return to North America when they are ready.  The Harper government wants to pass legislation to restrict their ability to return.  Trudeau has suggested that is a bad idea- perhaps it is not fair.  How fair would it be if one of them puts on a suicide belt and blows up someones friends and family?  If we do not get serious about this threat, both as it exists in the Middle East, and as it threatens us in North America, it will be in our midst before we know it. And once it gains traction here, it will be much more difficult to eradicate.  Islamic fundamentalism is a serious disease, it is lethal, and there is no cure.  And while I respect the need to control the Ebola virus, the Islamic fundamentalist virus is far more virulent and more dangerous.

What does this mean for us here in North America.  We have a serious problem.  Right now ISIS is sticking it tongue out at the US, is challenging the US, and is getting away with it.  Obama will not act without boots on the ground from others in the Middle East.  All he is doing is using technology to impair ISIS a little.  But anything less than a decisive victory against ISIS where it is effectively neutralized will make it a winner- and like a bully that has offered a challenge and seen the opponent back off, it will just be encouraged to become more virulent.  And perhaps worse, the more ISIS gains traction, the more it appears as the stronger part in the world of Islam, the more young Muslims who will join ISIS because it is seen as the winner, the victor, worthy of following, worthy of dying for.

And our serious problem is that Obama has shown no inclination for taking decisive action, and has treated the only country to have taken decisive action against Islamic fundamentalists, Israel, badly, threatened it, and shown personal derision.  We have a President who is either blind to the damage he is doing, or is very much aware of that damage, and relishes it.  In not acting, he is aiding and abetting an enemy that is not going away, that is a defined threat to our way of life, that is barbaric beyond out sensibilities, and has shown strength and the ability to grow.  These people may be disgusting, but they are smart, strategic, and they understand our weaknesses well enough to use them against us.

What we need to do- and I hope the next President of the US realizes this- is to take strong action against the fundamentalists, and to support those who fight them, like Israel. And secondly, closer to home, we need to take a close look at the plans that the fundamentalist Muslims have to “take down” the west and act to avert those plans.

Faith, fanaticism and fantasy in the Middle East

All three play leading roles in the current turmoil

By Clifford D. May 

September 17, 2014

“God created war,” Mark Twain theorized, “so that Americans would learn geography.” That’s as true today as it was two centuries ago. How many of us would be able to find Yemen, Somalia and Mali on a map if not for the conflicts raging in those lands?

These days war also presents an opportunity to learn a little history and theology. To do that, though, you have to separate the factual from the fanciful.

In his prime-time address to the nation last week, President Obama acknowledged that in the current era, “the greatest threats come from the Middle East and North Africa.” He added: “And one of those groups is ISIL — which calls itself the Islamic State.”

So far so good. However, then he went on to assert that the Islamic State “is not Islamic.” Why not? Because, he said, “No religion condones the killing of innocents, and the vast majority of ISIL’s victims have been Muslim.” Neither of those assertions bears scrutiny.

Certainly, there is nothing novel about Muslims killing Muslims. The First Islamic Civil War erupted in 656 A.D., only 24 years after the death of Muhammad, founder of the original Islamic State. The Battle of Karbala in 680 marked the start of a conflict between Sunni and Shia Muslims — one no peace process has managed to resolve.

Yes, there also have been intra-Christians conflicts: The Thirty Years War (1618-1648) was one. Northern Ireland in the 20th century suffered another. That only bolsters my point: Who would suggest that Christians who fight Christians are not Christians?

As for the notion that no religion condones the killing of innocents: The Aztecs, who ruled a great empire, believed they owed a debt to the gods that could only be paid by slaughtering virgins and children, many of whom were placed on slabs and had their beating hearts removed and held up to the sun.

Also, surely by now, we know that jihadis consider the term “innocent infidel” a contradiction in terms.

This brings us to the uncomfortable question that Mr. Obama was avoiding, and not addressing: What is the relationship between the Islamic faith and such entities as the Islamic State, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Hezbollah (which means “the Party of Allah”), and Hamas (which means “Islamic Resistance Movement”)?

A quick story may provide insight: Five years ago, on a visit to Pakistan, I met with a group of religious leaders — all Muslims but representing diverse interpretations of Islam. None supported Osama bin Laden, but none would call him an apostate or heretic. The reason, when you think about it, is obvious: Bin Laden was a fundamentalist, which means he insisted on a literal interpretation of scripture — no omissions, no revisions, no innovations. By contrast, a heretic is one who holds views that deviate from doctrine or orthodoxy. An apostate is someone who has turned his back on his religion.

Bin Laden; Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the self-anointed “caliph” of the Islamic State; Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, supreme leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran — all appear to be devout men who believe they are waging a divinely endorsed war against the West, in particular against America, the West’s leader, and Israel, the only nation in the Middle East not ruled by Muslims.

Do most of the world’s more than 1 billion Muslims embrace this worldview or participate in this project? No — but if even 10 percent do, that’s a serious problem, compounded by the fact that so few Muslims are both willing and able to challenge the jihadis.

Turkey, a NATO ally, has prohibited the use of the American-built Incirlik Air Base, where several thousand American airmen are stationed, for strikes against the Islamic State. Nor is Turkey helping crack down on the Islamic State’s lucrative trade in stolen oil. The 56-member Organization of Islamic Cooperation, a sort of Islamic United Nations, has so far offered only rhetorical support for the fight against the Islamic State.

By insisting that the Islamic State is not Islamic, Mr. Obama may think he’s demonstrating sensitivity. In fact, he’s letting Muslim leaders off the hook. They should be fighting the extremists within the umma, the global Islamic community — with force of arms, by defunding mosques and madrassas that promote jihadism, and by mounting “Not In Our Name” campaigns. Instead, they’re saying: “Since the Islamic State has nothing to do with Islam, it’s not our problem.”

Last week, I was among a small group who met with a leading Christian cleric from the Middle East. Among his Muslim neighbors, he said, “jihadis” are not numerous. They are, however, lethal — eager to persecute and slaughter the region’s 2,000-year-old Christian communities, as well as any Muslims suspected of dissidence, defiance or disobedience.

None of that surprised me. What did? His apparent acceptance of the inevitability of a large and expanding “Islamic world” whose rulers will never treat Christians as equal under the law — or in any other way. The best that Christians — and other minorities — can hope for is to serve their masters and perhaps be permitted to survive.

God willing, Americans should be learning from all this. One lesson: Despite touchy-feely talk of a “global village” and an “international community,” much of the world remains a jungle.

No benefit is derived from denying that supremacist, revanchist and bellicose movements have arisen from within the Islamic world. Such “violent extremists” — the more precise term would be religious fanatics — do indeed represent “the greatest threats” to civilization. That makes them enemies, and knowing our enemies is required if we are to develop coherent strategies to “ultimately defeat” them — which implies not just defeating the Islamic State, but also the disease of which it is a bloody symptom.

Clifford D. May is president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and a columnist for The Washington Times.
Washington Times: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/sep/16/may-faith-fanaticism-and-fantasy-in-the-middle-eas/