Monday, January 11, 2010


-Bosch Fawstin

Western intellectuals and commentators refer to the enemy's ideology as:

"Islamic Fundamentalism", "Islamic Extremism", "Totalitarian Islam", "Islamofascism", "Political Islam", "Militant Islam", "Bin Ladenism", "Islamonazism", "Radical Islam", "Islamism", etc....

The enemy calls it "Islam".

Imagine, if during past wars, we used terms such as "Radical Nazism", "Extremist Shinto" and "Militant Communism". Those who use terms other than "Islam" create the impression that it's some variant of Islam that's behind the enemy that we're facing. A term such as "Militant Islam" is redundant, but our politicians continue praising Islam as if it were their own religion. Bush told us, "Islam means peace" -- after 2,996 Americans were murdered in its name. He maintained that illusion throughout his two terms, and never allowed our soldiers to defeat the enemy. And now we have Obama, who tells us, from Egypt: “I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear." Washington's defense of Islam has trumped the defense of America and this dereliction of duty could well be called Islamgate.

Islam is a political religion; the idea of a separation of Mosque and state is unheard of in the Muslim world. Islam has a doctrine of warfare, Jihad, which is fought in order to establish Islamic ("Sharia") Law, which is, by nature, totalitarian. Sharia Law calls for, among other things: the dehumanization of women; the flogging/stoning/killing of adulterers; and the killing of homosexuals, apostates and critics of Islam. All of this is part of orthodox Islam, not some "extremist" form of it. If jihadists were actually "perverting a great religion", Muslims would have been able to discredit them on Islamic grounds and they would have done so by now. The reason they can't is because jihadists are acting according to the words of Allah, the Muslim God. From the Koran:

"Slay the idolators wherever you find them..." Chapter 9, verse 5

"When you encounter the unbelievers, strike off their heads until you have made a great slaughter among them...." Ch. 47:4

Beyond the doctrine, there is the historical figure of Mohammad, who, more than anyone, defines Islam. How would you judge a man who lies, cheats, steals, rapes and murders as a way of life? This evil man is Islam's ideal man, Mohammad. Whatever he said and did is deemed moral by virtue of the fact that he said it and did it. It's no accident that the only morality that could sanction his behavior was his own. Nor is it an accident that Muslims who model themselves after him are the most violent. For the 13 years that Mohammad failed to spread Islam by non-violent means, he was not so much peaceful as he was powerless. It was only through criminal activity that he gained power and a large gang of followers. But he wanted his moral pretense, too, so he changed Islam to reflect the fact that the only way it could survive was through force. And so, acting on Allah's conveniently timed "revelation" that Islam can and should be spread by the sword, Mohammad led an army of Muslims across Arabia in the first jihad. From then on, violence became Islam's way in the world. And today, acting on Mohammad's words, "War is deceit", Muslims use earlier "peaceful" verses from the Koran as a weapon against the ignorance and good will of their victims. Those "peaceful" passages in the Koran were abrogated by later passages calling for eternal war against those who do not submit to Islam. How Mohammad spread Islam influenced the content of its doctrine and therefore tells us exactly what Islam means.

Note also that the only reason we're talking about Islam is because we've been forced to by its jihad. And where are Islam's "conscientious objectors"? Nowhere to be found, for even lax Muslims have been silent against jihad. But that doesn't stop desperate Westerners from pointing to them as representives of "Moderate Islam". Far from being a personal faith, Islam is a collectivist ideology that rejects a live-and-let-live attitude towards non-Muslims. And while the jihadists may not represent all Muslims, they do represent Islam. In the end, most Muslims have proven themselves to be mere sheep to their jihadist wolves, irrelevant as allies in this war. Recovering Muslims call the enemy's ideology "Islam", and they dismiss the idea of "Moderate Islam" as they would the idea of "Moderate Evil". When, based on his actions, Mohammad would be described today as a "Muslim Extremist", then non-violent Muslims should condemn their prophet and their religion, not those who point it out.

Islam is the enemy's ideology and evading that fact only helps its agents get away with more murder than they would otherwise. Western politicians have sold us out, so it's up to the rest of us to defend our way of life by understanding Islam and telling the truth about it in whatever way we can. If we can't even call Islam by its name, how the hell are we going to defend ourselves against its true believers? One could argue that we'd be better off if the West would just choose one of the many terms currently used for the enemy's ideology. For my part, I call the enemy what they are, "Jihadists", and our response, "The War on Jihad." But behind it all, it's Islam that makes the enemy tick.

Despite my frustrations with the refusal of many to call Islam "Islam", I know that those who speak out against Jihad put themselves in danger, and I respect their courage. But it's important that we acknowledge Islam's place in the threat we face and say so without equivocation. Not saying "Islam" helps Islam and hurts us. So let's begin calling the enemy's ideology by its name. Let's start calling Islam "Islam."


Anonymous said...

Essential video about islam:

Anonymous said...

Bosch, your work makes it more and more difficult to pick a favorite. This is my current favorite.
The theme of this poster fits well with PJTV's most recent expose
The Islamist Infiltration: Inside Our Government. Armed With Our Secrets
In this interview a former security analyst from the DoD tells Bill Whittle of PJTV:
"It just seems that they completely picked up our whole National Security aparatus and moved it from a factual/legal basis to one that supports narratives."

The shocking 14 minute video interview can be seen here.


Always On Watch said...

Westerners refuse to accept the reality because to do so goes against so much of what Westerners believe. The idea of a tiny majority of extremists is so very appealing.

For decades now (at least), we have been taught that all religions speak to the good in mankind.

Islam, therefore, is regarded by the vast majority of Westerners as "just another religion."

Bosch Fawstin said...

Anon, I saw Bill Whittle's piece the other day, and it's worth mentioning that it was advertized all week as 'The Islamist Infiltration', until it was posted as 'The Islamic Infiltration', which some may take as no difference, but which I take as a great, slight move towards accuracy.

Right, AOW, and when Bush uttered, "Islam means peace", it was code for 'Religion means peace," and that attitude stayed the hand of an alleged 'war monger' from defeating a Very defeatable enemy.

Anonymous said...

Bosch, thank you so much for choosing to NOT suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune and for taking up your pen to help end them.

And thanks also for your take on Bush's possible reasoning with regard to the infamous "Islam means peace" mindbender. I take that as a sly, but still quite damaging, nod to the Islamic concept of "peace", which is supposed to come about once all opposition (us) are either dead, converted, or living in abject dhimmitude - the peace of ten billion asses (future) raised in the reverse direction of a skanky meteor, i.e. the "peace" of the grave or the neutered slave.

Anyway, praise be upon you.

Pastorius said...

Where are the conscientious objectors, indeed?

Islam seems to have very, very few of them, and their voice is even weaker than their numbers.

Islam is a herd mentality. It is sickening. Muslims ought to be ashamed of themselves for acting like beasts of the field. They claim a moral religion, but will not stand up against those in their midst who would seek to destroy us?


Because it is the way of Mohammed, and they know that. To deny Mohammed would be to deny their religion, and to deny their religion would be to be shunned by their family, their community, and often, to be killed.

Anonymous said...

Islam is a Trojan Horse already within Western societies:

A Jew With A View said...

Well said.

Western liberals persist in this idea that Islam has been 'hijacked' by extremists. They don't understand that Islam is not a religion in the way that Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism and other faiths are religions.

Allied to the issues you raise is, of course, the way that the charge of 'islamophobia' is hurled at those of us who speak out about the true nature of Islam: