CONFRONTING EVIL
Friday, July 27, 2007 at 10:34AM I read this liberal drivel in The Guardian today. Essentially, the author postulates that a blind faith in the moral superiority of our own way of life will only hinder efforts to tackle violent extremism. (aka terrorism, but she hates to use that awfully judgemental word, don't you know)
She suggests that...
"In the situation we find ourselves now, where a minority are so angered by the values of the west that they feel it right to act violently, the least useful response is to dismiss that reaction as evil or incomprehensible. It is imperative that we understand that other value systems have, whether we like it or not, their own deep appeal. After all, it's not as if many of us can't see the multiple ways in which competitive capitalist democracies leave people feeling anxious and adrift.."
Well, I'm afraid that I DO feel a sense of moral superiority over Islamic savages that killed innocents by detonating themselves on the London Underground, who hijacked aircraft and flew them into office blocks killing thousands on 9/11, who boast that they love death like we love life. And I'm afraid that I DO see their actions as unequivocally evil. And I see NO excuse for their dark ages barbarism. Guardianistas may get quite excited "understanding" the morality that leads Islam to wage war against our civilisation, I get angry about it.
Islam 
View Printer Friendly Version
Reader Comments (29)
Davis
As an occasional Guardian reader I have to say that I agree with you 100%. This is just another example of the plague of moral relativism.
Hang on though. All she is saying is that we need to understand why people hold such oddball extremist beliefs.
This doesn't mean she sees these beliefs as in any way comparable to liberal democracy/capitalism (I hope).
And, in fact, by understanding such views, won't we be better armed to counter them?
Reg, I understand that these terrorists wish to destroy my entire way of life and probably kill the likes of me in doing so. There; I understand all that I need to understand.
I understand that these terrorists wish to destroy my entire way of life and probably kill the likes of me in doing so. There; I understand all that I need to understand.
Do you reckon that understanding is enough to defeat them ?
The fact that I understand their evil intent is insufficient. If I could elect a government which shared my understanding would be a different matter.
What hogwash from Jenni. Osama is richer than most capitalists yet she thinks it is capitalism that drives his rage.
There are basic human rights which are in fact universal, even if they are not universally accepted. She can castigate Blair for a lot of things but he was right about that.
And her claim that the evil is incomprehensible is misguided. It is entirely comprehensible. Two simple truths: the world is a dangerous place and there are those (hello Jenni) who don't know it.
Jenni Russell's desire to understand the other persons point of view is of little comfort if the other person is armed, and does'nt share your 'belief system'.
Moral relativism and being gunned down for your pains, is probabley best way for 'liberals' to get the message!
Bernard,
did that change Frank Gardner's outlook?
i'm not so sure it did, but i agree, its a good starting point :)
sooner them than me... i dont wanna be sacrificed on any altar to spineless liberalism
Following recent events I've being trying to understand Muslim doctors' point of view. Why are they as likely to kill a Kaffir as cure him?
The Constitution of the Muslim Doctors and Dentists Association [ http://www.mdda.org.uk/web/constitution.php ] is quite illuminating in this respect...
"2.1 The objects of the association shall be:-
2.1.1. To advance the Islamic religion in the practice of medicine in the United Kingdom
2.1.2. To advance medical education in relation to the doctrines, practices and traditions of the Islamic religion.
2.1.3. To promote research in various aspects of medical science and to disseminate and publish the useful results of such research.
2.1.4. To promote the preservation and protection of the good health of Muslims in the United Kingdom. "
blah, blah...
BUT NOWHERE IS THERE ANY MENTION OF PROMOTING THE HEALTH OF NON-MUSLIMS! Presumably if Allah had wanted Muslim doctors to preserve and protect the health of the Kaffirs he wouldn't have created MRSA.
What really gets me is that I'm paying taxes to keep these malpractising quacks employed in the NHS where they don't give a flying f*** about the welfare of their Kaffir patients. I just hope I never end up at the tender mercy of these scum.
Anything in the Muslim Doctors and Dentists Association about non-violence such as not going about trying to blow up airports packed with school-children getting ready for holiday?
No!
I didn't think that there would be.
Very good reference point, Gudone; It's a real enough comparison:
Frank Gardner genuinely thought that by quoting the Koran in Arabic to his two Saudi killers as they stood over him, it would reach into their inner souls, and a common humanity would save him.
They paused and listened before shooting him about 8 times, if I remember his account.
The other 'mistake' he made was hiring and trusting an English speaking Arab minder to escort him around.
This guy disappeared moments before the attack.
Is FG still a 'liberal' ?
I would guess so; the only way they'll be shaken out of their Righteousness, is to die for it....
THE TRIUMPH OF ISLAM - HOW TRIBALISM TRUMPS RATIONALISM AND CIVILISATION.
Viewed rationally, Islam is a non-starter. Its 'Holy' Book consists of half-digested fragments of Judeo-Christian theology, mixed with the bile of hatred, and spewed into the fair face of Christendom from the putrifying guts of a violent, deceitful, plundering pedophile. The Koran is full of historical, scientific and logical errors and even contradicts itself on numerous occasions. Not exactly the work of a Supreme Intellect!
And yet Muslims claim that these demented ramblings and rantings are the literal word of God Almighty, to be treated with utmost respect. They throw enormous tantrums when Korans are left in toilets or returned to libraries with bacon-rashers as bookmarks. In the Islamic paradise of Pakistan, damaging a Koran or insulting The Pedophile are punishable by death.
To understand Islam we need to look at the most primitive organisational state of mankind - Tribalism.
If we regard the Ummah as a tribe, and the Koran, the Pedophile and the Black Meteorite as the tribe's three main totems, we begin to get a better understanding of Islam. A tribe derives its identity and unity by displays of reverence towards supernatural totems, and feels insecure and threatened whenever the power of its totems is weakened, for example by the totems being 'humiliated' or 'polluted' . One of the surest ways of demoralising a tribe has always been to desecrate its totems.
This explains the rage at the Motoons, and the 'hate crime' of the Koran down the toilet. It also explains why the Saudi authorities made such a fuss when they found a Christian in Mecca. The precincts of the Holy Meteorite had been defiled by a najis kaffir.
Tribal culture and psychology are difficult for civilised people to understand. Most parts of Western Europe have not been organised tribally since the Dark Ages, so it's difficult to get inside Muslim mind and understand just how primitive and benighted are the psychological processes that go on there. For example:
- A tribe regards itself as perpetually at war with all other tribes - hence the Muslim worldview of Dar a-Harb in conflict with Dar al-Islam, and Ummah in conflict with Kaffir.
- The property and women of other tribes are there for the taking. Might is right - hence the Jizya, Razzia, white slaving etc which are all justified by the Koran. Tribalism also explains the chants of 'We will take your wives for booty' at the London Motoons demonstration - this is the typical behavior of the stone age savage.
- The ethics of reciprocity (do as you would be done by) only apply within the tribe. Hence the lack of any Golden Rule in Islam. The nearest you get to the Golden Rule in the Koran is desiring for your brother Muslim ('kin-selection') what you desire for yourself - in other words share out the booty equally.
- Loyalty to the tribe is of paramount importance - hence the punishment by death for apostates.
- The tribe must not mingle with other tribes or else it may lose its identity - hence the self-imposed ghettoisation and ethnic cleansing of Kaffirs from the periphery of the ghetto as seen in European cities.
- There is a great desire to destroy or humiliate the totems of other tribes, especially where they have phallic significance - hence the attack on the twin towers, and the plans for the MegaMosque whose minarets will be taller than any Christian building.
Muslims in the modern world are living fossils, though like dinosaurs suddenly set down on the streets of London, none the less dangerous for being so primitive. Islam appeals to the lowest and basest instincts of man, and in the absence of a strong, confident modern culture will gradually reduce its host society to a disfunctional state of anarchy where Islam can gain the upper hand.
Tribalism makes it impossible to defeat Islam by reason or appeals to decency. The Koran, the Pedophile and the Meteorite are not capable of being examined rationally or ethically - they are pre-rational symbols of tribal cohesion. And when that tribe is on a roll , and believes itself to be the strongest and fastest growing tribe winning the Jihad against all the rest, no rational argument will persuade its warriors to abandon the winning side.
The Ummah may eventually have an 'Emperor's New Clothes Moment', but it will not come about by reviewing the evidence for a flat earth in the Koran. It is more likely to happen by military defeat in a European Civil War or World War III.
And when that tribe is on a roll , and believes itself to be the strongest and fastest growing tribe winning the Jihad against all the rest, no rational argument will persuade its warriors to abandon the winning side.
As an atheist I despise islam as much as any other superstition, but I can see that in 2007 it is more backward and vastly more violent than the other main religions of the world. However, I have a couple of problems with your post.
Are you saying that all followers of islam from all races worldwide are part of "the tribe" and support jihad? If so, please justify. If not, please refine your argument.
Epimenides, I have written some long diatribes at ATW, but yours takes the cake. Well written, cogent and passionate. I give it two thumbs up.
Peter - You, of all the athiests (besides DSD) at ATW seem to be aware of Islam's inherrent barbarism. I doubt any anti-islamic person thinks all muslims support jihad, but the majority of muslims, through their lack of public counterpoint, seem to condone it in abstensia.
David, your new poll doesn't give me an acceptable option. The verbiage sucks, so I'll decline to participate in this one.
"Far Right Texas Conservative" would have been a good choice ;-)
Peter said
"Are you saying that all followers of islam from all races worldwide are part of "the tribe" and support jihad? If so, please justify"
ALL Muslims regard the Quran as the literal word of Allah (if you don't you're an apostate and we all know what happens...) So here are the commands of the Creator of the Universe:
Qu' ran 5:33 The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger and strive after corruption in the land will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land. Such will be their degradation in the world, and in the Hereafter theirs will be an awful doom"
Qur'an:9:5: "Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war."
Qur'an:9:29 "Fight those who do not believe until they all surrender."
Qur'an:8:39 "So fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief/non-Muslims) and all submit to the religion of Allah alone."
Qur'an:2:216 "Warfare is ordained for you."
P.S. If Allah is omnipotent why can't he exterminate the Kuffar himself? Why does he need to employ incompetent creeps to drive flaming Jeeps into airport lounges?
Epimenides - because he's not God.
Liberals love talking about how we need to "understand" our enemies, particularly our Islamic ones. The problem is that, essentially, by "understand", they mean 'condone', or at least 'not condemn'. So many of them seem genuinely to believe that because Bin Laden had a series of irrational grievances against the US, that made the American government more responsible than al-Qaeda for 9/11.
Oddly enough, liberals seem very reluctant to "understand" that Islam is a totalitarian ideology, that Islamic violence is motivated by Islamic beliefs, that Islam does pose a threat to us all, that if they were in an Islamic state they would be second-class citizens at best, and that a significant minority of Muslims are prepared to use violence against us in order to get their way. Equally, if they're so keen on "understanding" why people disagree with them, why is it that they always dismiss any concerns anyone raises about unlimited mass immigration as "racist"?
Epimenides said
"What really gets me is that I'm paying taxes to keep these malpractising quacks employed in the NHS where they don't give a flying f*** about the welfare of their Kaffir patients. I just hope I never end up at the tender mercy of these scum.
ALL Muslims regard the Quran as the literal word of Allah (if you don't you're an apostate and we all know what happens...)"
Do not fear Epimenides, because the Vatican is here. Vatican to the rescue!
"And all heretics, of both sexes and of every name, we damn to perpetual infamy; we declare hostility against them; we account them accursed, and their goods confiscated; nor can they ever enjoy their property, or their children succeed to their inheritance; inasmuch as they grievously offend against the Eternal as well as the temporal king [the pope]."
source: [Quinta Compilatio Epistolarum Decretalium Honorii III. P.M. Innocentii Cironii, Juris Utriusque Professoris, Canonici ac Ecclesiae, et Academae Tolosannae Cancellarii, Comp. v. tit. iv. cap. i. p. 200; Tolosae.]
"I. Excommunication. This sentence is to be pronounced not only on notorious heretics, and those suspected of heresy, but also on those who harbour, defend, or assist them, or who converse familiarly with them, or trade with them, or hold communion of any sort with them.
II. Proscription from all offices, ecclesiastical or civil,--from all public duties and private rights.
III. Confiscation of all their goods.
IV. The last punishment is DEATH; sometimes by the sword,--more commonly by fire."
[JUS CANONICUM; Digestum et Enucleatum juxta Ordinem Librorum et Titulorum qui in Decretalibus Epistolis Gregorii IX. P. M. Georgii Adami Struvi, pp. 359-363: Lipsiae et Jenae.]
"Those are not to be accounted homicides who, fired with zeal for Mother Church, may have killed excommunicated persons."
[Decreti, pars ii. causa xxiii. quaest v. can. xlvii:]
The Bishop of Rome may be judged of none but of God only.
Decreti, pars ii. causa iii. quest. vi. can. ix.
Whatever belongs to priests cannot be usurped by kings.
Idem, Decreti, pars i. distinct. x. can, v.
The law of the emperors cannot dissolve the ecclesiastical law.
Idem, Decreti, pars i. distinct. x. can. i.
The temporal power can neither loose nor bind the Pope.
Idem, Decreti, pars i. distinct. xcvi. can. vii.
It does not belong to the Emperor to judge the actions of the Pope.
Idem, Decreti, pars i. distinct. xcvi. can. viii.
The Emperor ought to obey, not command, the Pope.
Idem, Decreti, pars i. distinct. xcvi. can. xi.
[The Papacy: Its History, Dogmas, Genius, and Prospects, by J. A. Wylie, Book I, Chapter 6:]
Ulster-Scot, when were any of those punishments last implemented by the Catholic Church? I think you're just a wee bit over the edge now.
Allan@Oslo,
Whenever they had the power to act them out. The Canons and dogma still exists, it has never been overturned, and what I quoted is just the tip of the ice-berg.
Infallible according to the Roman Catholic Church and any dictionary says, "Incapable of error in expounding doctrine on faith and morals. Said especially of the Pope speaking ex cathedra."
I say let the mad-mullahs and the RC's battle it out themselves. The ordinary Christian and Muslim doesn't need this kind of thing. If certain elements of Christendom and Islam want to declare power over the world, it's kings and it's Governors, let them fight to the death, just don't try to bring good decent folk into it.
Ulster-Scot. As far as i can see that Evangelical churches and followers seem just as maniacal when it comes to the "islam problem".
The rhetoric is elemental and frankly disturbing.
Good morning, Daphne.
I would like to expand on your observation that the verbiage in David's current poll [How Would You Describe Your Political Views] sucks.
If you map out David's three choices: Generally Liberal (GL), Generally Right of Liberal (GROL) and Centrist, you get this diagram, starting from the left
GL----------------------GROL----------------------C
I chose "Centrist" for the simple reason that my point of view is ALWAYS in the center, and others orbit around me. That would place you (Far Right Texas Conservative) just to my right. :-)
Ulster-Scot. As far as i can see that Evangelical churches and followers seem just as maniacal when it comes to the "islam problem".
daytripper, Is it any wonder?, most of them are the daughters of the GREAT WHORE. They seperated from the Pope part and some others, but they're still as guilty in other areas, especially in money. They learned that one straight from the canons below:
The Bishop of Rome may excommunicate emperors and princes, depose them from their states, and assoil their subjects from their oath of obedience to them.
[Decreti, pars i, distinct. xcvi. can. x., and Decreti, pars ii. causa xv. quest. vi. can. iii. iv. v.]
It is not lawful for laymen to impose taxes or subsidies upon the clergy. If laics encroach upon cleric immunities, they are, after admonition, to be excommunicated. But in times of great necessity, the clergy may grant assistance to the State, with permission of the Bishop of Rome.
[Decret. Gregorii, lib. iii. tit. xlix. cap. iv. and vii.]
The man who takes the money of the Church is as guilty as he who commits homicide. He who seizes upon the lands of the Church is excommunicated, and must restore four-fold.
[Decreti, pars ii. causa xii. quest, ii. can. i. iv. vii.]
The wealth of dioceses and abbacies must in nowise be alienated. It is not lawful for even the Pope himself to alienate the lands of the Church.
[Decreti, pars ii. causa xii. quest. ii, can. xii. xix. xi.]
The rhetoric is elemental and frankly disturbing.
What??....My rhetoric is more disturbing than the Canons of the Roman Catholic church?...wise up, and stop defending the indefensible because some Priest or Bishop has blackmailed people into thinking you're cursed and excommunicated from God, if you do object.
Do you know what's disturbing daytripper?, it's the fact that this evil Vatican system is admired and adored the world over and all it's evil brushed under the carpet. That's disturbing!
I'm not a follower or supporter of religions be they Evangelical, catholic, Roman Catholic or so-called Protestant ones. I'm a believer in reformed Christianity which the Protestant reformers encouraged, the practice of Semper Reformada [always reforming]
Ulster-Scot wrote:
"daytripper, Is it any wonder?, most of them are the daughters of the GREAT WHORE."
Imagine if people who thought like this had a state or nuclear weapons!
Frank,
I can't be bothered reading all this medieval religious drivel, but did someone called Ulser-Scot just call Barbara Bush a GREAT WHORE? Doesn't that kind of talk belong over on the Lib Dem Strippers thread?
Alan,
"did someone called Ulser-Scot just call Barbara Bush a GREAT WHORE"
Apparently the really big insult in Ulster-Scot's circles is to be related to a great whore (e.g. mother, daughter), rather than to actually be one.
It wouldn't surprise me if we are all at least fourth or fifth cousins twice removed of a really great whore, or at least of a half-hearted tart, but I don't really follow the rest of the argument.
Imagine if people who thought like this had a state or nuclear weapons!
Sounds like an entry for the Hitch-Hikers
Earth: Run by well armed nutjobs. Avoid.