Roger L. Simon: Dangers of Dawa

I have never been much for proselytizing, whether by Scientology or Amway. The cult-like quality of this behavior is all too evident, if sometimes comic. But this morning it wasn't so funny when I read on LGF that the US Navy sailor whose email turned up on the computer of a terrorist in Britain told his British compatriot he wanted to "keep up the dawah."

What is dawa? For those who don't know, it's proselytizing for Islam, "an obligatory duty (fard) for Muslims." This is the kind of obligatory duty, of course, that encourages a fanatic to write email to homicidal lunatics with the locations and counter-terror strategies of naval vessels (or anything else, for that matter... like where you go to work). I am tired of the War on Terror euphemism. This is mind-cult enemy which must named. This is a War on Islamofascism. You wouldn't fight AIDS by calling it a War on Sickness.

UPDATE: Belmont Club has a characteristically brilliant post in which he posits the possibility that we may be closer to winning this war (whatever we call it) than we think, then jumps ahead to what this all might mean. The Sam Harris book linked below is mentioned. (BTW, Wretchard's theory seems contingent on the premise that Al Qaeda in and of itself is the enemy. I think that may be too limiting.)

Comments

Comments require registration through TypeKey. Abusive remarks may be deleted. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of Roger Simon.

And shame on you, Roger, everyone knows you fight AIDS by damning Reagan in his grave for not curing it...

In a post-modern world of group-identity uber alles, of course no religion could be "singled out" as you are suggesting. What are you going to propose next, that we take a closer look at non-citizens from the Middle East entering our country? Get Johnnie Cochran on the line, pronto.

You must know by now that it is for important that followers of the religion of peace to feel good about themselves than that we call a spade a spade...

The good news is we know a lot about waging war on and winning war over a cult-like ideology. We defeated Communism. Took over a hundred years, but we learned a lot about that kind of war.

It's center is not in any one country. But you crush the countries that are infected by the mental disease and thus discredit the ideas.

It's tactics include a fifth column in the U.S. and Western Civilization. You defeat their arguments relentlessly and thoroughly.

It is essentially weak because at its core is a set of ideas of humans being powerless. I mean, the core of the U.S. and Western Civilization is individual freedom and personal choice. These are far more powerful than the collectivism of Communism or the righteous morality of Islamofascism.

Oh, yes, we also defeated Nazism and Fascism. Since they worshiped power, all we had to do was stand up to them and be more powerful. Islamofascism also has a belief in the primacy of will and power. Crushing them in the field is essential to destroying their ideas.

"The good news is we know a lot about waging war on and winning war over a cult-like ideology. We defeated Communism. Took over a hundred years, but we learned a lot about that kind of war."

The bad news is the current crop of villains seek death through martyrdom and will soon have, if they do not already, nuclear or biological weapons.

More bad news...half of the nation and most of our allies are living in a fantasy reality where tact and diplomacy are the key to winning the war.

Great post!. Sissy, great link! This is the heart of the entire debate. All the rest of the Idea's on the debate on this issue are pointless unless everyone comes to the conclusion that we are facing a sick, determined enemy who will do anything to impose this virulent worldview upon the entire world. They have declared their intentions and they have no fallback position. They will not stop until they have imposed this sick varient of Islam on the entire world. For them it is sharia law everywhere or nothing.

The rest of the world is in severe denial. They are hoping that some sort of middle ground can be reached thru diplomacy or by "understanding" a different culture. Theresa Kerry proposed the other day that "holding hands and talking" is the proper response to the threat of Islamofacism. What she fails to realize is that after she "holds hands" with these people they will cut her hand off and mail it to President Kerry,sorry to make you all shudder but this is a possibility, and mail it to the White House along with a ransom note. Not all Muslims in the world share this belief in sharia law but the moderate and reasonable Muslims of the world do not have any power or influence on the leaders that do hold power. We have to deal with countries that are spreading the violence and the funding the terrorists. it will be a lomg painfull struggle and we will have many awfull defeats in this struggle. But holding our heads under the pillow and wishing that it will go away will not work. If Kerry would tell us what his "secret plan" is I might consider supporting him. But so far all I have heard from him is a return to the failed middle east policies of the last 50 years. If we were not a target I could go with the slow diplomatic response. but since I have heard nothing that tells me that the radical Islamist's have stopped their plans to make war on this country and the world i can't support Kerry.

I think this is very different from the cold war. In that case, the enemy was a single communist state, the USSR, and it's subsidiaries. Hence when the center fell, almost all of the rest fell. But totalitarian Communism still exists in Cuba and Vietnam, and a hostile fascist regime still exists in China.

The difference between a Muslim and an Islamofascist is very hear to tell, and furthermore, Muslims can be converted to Islamofascists (witness Mohammed Atta in Hamburg) and they become far more fanatic that most communists. The cult-like nature of Islamofascist cells is apparent in Mohammed Atta's instructions to his fellow terrorists.

One wonders about this sailor. Was he Muslim? Did he meet any Islamofascists? It would appear that he engaged in treason, although there may not be enough evidence to directly tie him to the information. One also wonders if military internet traffic (if this was sent that way) is archived forever. Knowing the NSA, it probably is.

The larger question is: do we have to treat every Muslim in the service with suspicion? We already have three unusual activities by them: the Marine who was/was not AWOL/kidnapped; the fellow who threw a grenade into a command tent early in the war (or before, don't remember); and now the sailor who may have done something.

An even larger question is: what about the US Muslim population? A recent guest on Fox estimated that 50% of that population would support jihad or jihadis. Let's assume that's an exaggeration and the number is 1% (which I think is too small). That's still a lot of dangerous people in our midst. Furthermore, a bunch of them may have been converted to radical Islam in jail - a nice combination of an evil theology and criminality.

We are going to have to deal with this, and it is going to be unpleasant and ugly. It's not illegal to believe jihadist beliefs, but it can be catastrophic to act on them. Multiculturalism will impeded the process.

One could imagine the next attack being a result of a jihadi travelling the country handing out suicide belts to American Islamofascists, and then having a signal to cause them to all go out to busy places and blow up. Suddenly the war on terror could be in 50 or 100 cities and towns.

Reading Roger's site over the past few days, I have appreciated your comments and insights. Thanks.

It is true that the Soviets were the center of the Communist cult, and when it fell the ideas fell with it. So far, we haven't been able to find a center of the Islamofascists to defeat. But, I think that another way of thinking about it is that at the heart of Communism was an idea that was exposed as bogus.

So, it seems to me that we fought that war on two major fronts, ideologically and militarily (militarily includes economically and diplomatically to me).

My suggestion is that we need to fight the Islamofascist on both of these same fronts, and realize that there is a fifth column in the U.S. and the West who are against us.

You shouldn´t be overconfident about defeating islamofascism. This time you are fighting two ideologies: Islam and the Left which supports them conscious or unconsciously.

The left is taking up it's traditional role of supplying fifth column tactics to help the enemies of the U.S. defeat us, and most important to their minds, defeat capitalism.

They seem to be blind to the fact that the first ones to be slaughtered by the Islamofascists is them. What the Islamofascists hate the most of all is everything that the left stands for - abortion, divorce, homosexuality, pornography, atheism, agnosticism, secularism, tolerance (oops, got carried away there).

Agree. One of the current battle grounds is the whole PC mindset. This is probably why so many have staked their future on Kerry. Myself, I always regarded PC as a form of politeness, just as one shouldn't yell F*CK in church. On the other hand, I thought that everyone knew that there were certain truths that were self evident, but simply impolite to express in cultured company. I was wrong, there are actually lots of people who believe that nonsense. This silliness has got to go.

The Belmont Club commentary is encouraging. Apparently, the architecture of the cell structure of Al Qaeda is "shallow." Which is to say that there are a very limited number of "commanders" in the organization. Take out just a couple of significant figures under Bin Laden and you have done major damage to its effectiveness.

That said, there is still the issue of Iran. I don't see how this thing can be won until Iran is wrested from the mullahs.

Here's my question for the day: are people in Blue States more likely than those in Red States to allow terrorists a comfortable base from which to plan their operations? If so (and I think the answer to this one is pretty obvious) how is the federal government going to protect the nation as a whole?

I bring this up because, as a native Upstate New Yorker, I've watched in horror as three separate incidents have made the national news over the past year and a half. First, the notorious Lackawana jihadis. Second, the (under reported) Syracuse prison imams fomenting Islamofascism in a cozy penal setting. Now, just this past week, we find out that would-be terrorists are operating out of a storefront mosque in downtown Albany.

What gives? Well, according to a good friend who is an attorney for NY state (and a quasi-Republican) it's because New Yorkers are tolerant and fair minded, cost of living is low and welfare benefits generous. I suggested she get her head out of her private parts before she and her "open-minded" neighbors got us all blown to hell. In fact, all my many family members and friends from the NEast would agree with her and find my politics repulsive.

I hate to say it, but our friends in the Blue States need to have their "consciousness" raised and fast. A little healthy skepticism toward the words of total strangers is a GOOD thing. We don't all have to become hardened cynics, but we shouldn't just repeat the mantra "Islam is a religion of PEACE" when we see something that suggests otherwise. I think it bears pointing out that Moussaoui was caught in the midwest, where people are a bit more suspicious of outsiders and don't care who calls them racist because of it.

I am from the midwest and I got one of those insipid little lectures myself. The thing is the terrorists are far more likely to kill people in the blue states. That might be because red staters would be saying "You're not from around here are you son?" to the nice young man wearing the kill jews bandana.

The other day I was approached by a Jehova Witness. They have to spread the word too. He helped me put my groceries in the car and gave me a copy of the WatchTower. He did not run into the store screaming God Is Great at the top of his lungs just before he blew himself and several other people up. There is nothing wrong with having faith. Religion is a source of comfort to many people. The problem is when your religion is more important than someone else's life.

If a bunch of Jihadists just want to lie low and blend in, then NY or LA *BLue) is the place to be, but if they want to set up a training camp out in the boonies and conduct some weapons practice, it'll be in a Red state, or at least the "red" part of a blue state.

We don't have a good metric to measure this war by. The figure of Moslems worldwide is 1.4 billion. How many of them are hardcore Islmist extremeists? How many genuinely back the extremists? How many go along with the extremists since their they guys with the guns? How many actively oppose it? And, considering the Moslem punishment for apostsy, how many aren't Moslems at all?

How those percentages shake out is critical to how difficult this war will be. I'll admit to not having the slightest idea what those percentages are. Depending on my pessimisim of the moment, those numbers shift on a daily basis in my mind.

Let's assume that the Al-Qaeda militia sets up on about 500 acres in rural Alabama (since I live there). They bring in their people, their weapons, etc. Well, let's see, how many people? 25, 50, more? They'll be noticed. "Hey, guys, somebody bought the old Johnson place! What say the Baptist Fellowship welcomes them to the neighborhood!" That still happens a lot. Traffic on roads, people in stores buying more food than usual (leaving aside the difficulties, if any, with halal), etc. And such strange accents too! "You ain't from 'round here, are you, boy?"

They start training. What does that involve? Gunfire? Explosions? "Hey Sheriff, I heard an awful lot of shooting back behind my place. I didn't know there was anybody back there. It ain't deer season is it?" Next thing you know, the Sheriff or the game warden goes back there to "say Howdy". Or worse yet, it is deer season! Now the woods are full of good old boys with rifles, who hear all this racket and likewise go looking. Think they won't be suspicious of the "furriners", especially if they just happen not to be using English in training?

Then, of course, there's the State Police, conducting air recon for the War on Drugs. No doubt they could kill all these people, but that would raise a few eyebrows too. How long did the militia groups really stay hidden? People knew they were there, and any time something happened, the cops had (and still do) a ready made list of suspects to check alibis on.

Islamofascism is too suspicious a term to the PC crowd. It's a little too nebulous and doesn't hit a bullseye in describing who are our enemies. When people hear it for the first time, they can sometimes think you're equating Islam with Fascism.

I've decided to use the term, Jihadism to describe the War On Terror. Framing it this way helps the arguement for going into Iraq. It really didn't matter what Middle Eastern country we went into, we had to show the ME that Jihadism is a losing game. Iraqis are learning this intimately, when seeing the Jihadists kill more Muslims/Iraqis then Infidels/Coaltion troops. It also ignores the many sects of Islam and focus' on all who practice violent Jihad. It also helps that it doesn't mention Islam in it's title but does specify a very dsitinct brand of Islam.

I think most Muslims are like everyone else. They just want to be left alone. I imagine these terrorists are in many ways as scarey to them as they are to us. At least I don't worry that my kids will become suicide bombers. The modern world is too much competition for the Islamofascists. They despise individual thought and democracy and of course without these things the ME will always be behind. So I would think the average Muslims have as much or more to fear from the likes of Osama as we do. But I do think their religion makes introspection difficult and so it is resistant to reform.

I am tired of the War on Terror euphemism. This is mind-cult enemy which must named. This is a War on Islamofascism. You wouldn't fight AIDS by calling it a War on Sickness.

Wretchard's theory seems contingent on the premise that Al Qaeda in and of itself is the enemy. I think that may be too limiting.

To condemn all of Islam is undoubtedly too much. But one can't help but notice that it is Muslims killing Indians, Muslims killing Africans, Muslims killing Phillipinos, Muslims killing Europeans, that in fact most of the violent problems worldwide are on the periphery of the Muslim world. There's something deeply wrong there and we're going to have to admit it honestly before we can deal with it.

Holdfast wrote: If a bunch of Jihadists just want to lie low and blend in, then NY or LA *BLue) is the place to be, but if they want to set up a training camp out in the boonies and conduct some weapons practice, it'll be in a Red state, or at least the "red" part of a blue state

Ha, ha! Don't get out much, do you? I've driven all over the Great Plains from Idaho to Alabama, from New Mexico to Michigan, and I can guarantee there is almost no possibility of setting up a terrorist training camp without everyone's knowing all about it. People may be thin on the ground, but that makes them far more watchful, not less.

Your comment reminds me of a bank robber in Colorado a few months ago who, having escaped the Colorado authorities, drove straight into Kansas in hopes of escaping into the plains. That's the worst thing he could possibly have done. Any other direction at all would have been preferable from his point of view. He was immediately apprehended. Kansas is under control and the laws are obeyed.

Terrye wrote: I do think their religion makes introspection difficult and so it is resistant to reform.

As I understand it, Islam at its core denies the very possibility of reform. To the Islamic view, there is no such thing as progress and there is no such thing as natural law. There is only the here and now, which is completely Allah's whim, and if Allah wants to change everything around within the next second, He will.

Societies like Japan and Singapore and Mexico which are clearly making enormous progress are a significant problem to be dealt with in such a Weltanschauung.

If the Belmont Club is accurate about our progress against al Qaeda and about its cells being shallow, then it would also put to rest one of the favored anti-war chestnuts-that going to war in Iraq was going to create thousands of bin Ladens and there'd be jihadists everywhere.

However, I agree that al Qaeda is not the whole ball game. The mullahs in Iran have quite a farm system quite apart from any response on their part to the liberation of Iraq.

My Joe (who worked in Defense Intelligence for many many years and handled the classification/de-classification of intelligence) thinks it's not a good idea to switch from War on Terrorism to War on Islamist Terrorism. Whenever you narrow the focus of a threat, you risk the danger of not dealing with other threats.

(Remember what happened in the '90's after the fall of the Soviet Union. Well, we're safe now. No worries. The Soviets were the threat so we can loosen up. Hence we were losing information to Kaddafi and Saddam etc. )

"War on Terrorism" is valid because many groups who aren't Islamist may have now or in the future have ties to Islamist groups. And, a point he brought up which I thought very important is that Japan, for example, would have no interest in being our ally if we were only concerned with Islamists.

Islamist terrorism and the movement behind it can certainly be shown to be the major threat facing us now, and the use of the term breaks the taboo of PC. So it's good to bring it up and define and explain it, but the basic term 'War on Terror' should remain.

I like your term "jihadism," as it seems to me to strike exactly the right balance between accuracy and (not unnecessarily) offending all of Islam.

Not only is Islam resistant to reform it actively resists it. That is why the terrorists must destroy democracy. Congress writes law and the law already exists. It is called sharia and to write other laws or ignore the laws of sharia is heresy. No ifs ands or buts.

Imagine in this country the people that are most likely to hate Jews and Christians and defend these killers are the people someone like Osama would shoot first. go figure. Maybe the Islamists are not the only suicidal folks out there.

Terrye wrote: Maybe the Islamists are not the only suicidal folks out there.

Absolutely spot on. Consider Mr. Soros for example. There's a lot of guilt he needs to expiate, apparently (billions of dollars' worth). There are many many self-hating trustfunders produced each year by our miraculous economy. Did you see the discussion on the anti-Semitism among Jews in the Bay Area the other day?

Moving On from our own self-hatred has got to be Job One if we ever hope to get through this thing.

Speaking of the Bay area I heard that some young man from San Francisco faked his own beheading on the internet. He was making a political statement.

I think that some people feel they can make up for their good fortune by attacking their own kind. That is why movie stars who live like royalty stand up for the working guy and rock stars trash conservatives.

Kinda makes me wonder why Streisand and Springsteen and Soros and the gang don't pool their considerable wealth and do something productive with it rather than use it to try and buy off their shame for being rich. Just give it away and they too can be among the little people you profess such concern for.

Terrye — P.J. O'Rourke has pointed out that celebrities, especially Hollywood celebrities, have absolutely no idea what money can do. As for Soros, the man made his pile as an international currency raider. Money is something you steal...For little Stevie Bing, money is something you launder. Of course, for Michael Moore, money is something you damn other people for having...

I heard the "hold hands and talk' comment on the radio. I believe it was taken from one of the recent Kerry whistlestops but I can't be sure. i imagine it will show in print somewhere soon

Wichita Boy — Islam can't reform. How do you reform the directly revealed Word of God? That's why in the long term, if the West doesn't just collapse, Islam is a doomed faith...

Out here in Utah (I guess we are the template for blue) there are numerous places out in the toolies where people go to shoot.

Since 9/11 I've made it a point to scope out my favorite venues with a drive by before picking a spot to set up. I found out early on that I'm not alone. On more than one occasion I've had 'friendly visits' (I have some military-looking weapons) and I've made some too - especially when the group was composed of younger folks. We've got a whole boatload of back country but what the earthraper motorhead gun nuts don't cover the mountainbiker/birkenstock brigades cover quite effectively. The most remote communities tend to be the most clannish; nothing happens in their neighborhoods without it becomes public knowledge within days.

"AL-HINDI is believed to have been born in 1971 and raised in Middlesex in a Hindu family. Acquaintances remember him as an unassuming young man, 5ft 5in tall. “He was softly-spoken and typically wore round-framed spectacles, casual western-style dress like cardigan and loafers, and had a neatly-trimmed beard,” said a former acquaintance.

He converted to Islam aged 20 after a holiday in the disputed Indian province of Kashmir. According to friends, he became alienated from his parents, abandoning the family name,Patel."
Sunday Times 8th Aug,A very interesting article,sorry won't lnk.

This is the problem, our free society is being used against us,towns and cities are the places they can disappear.Weapons training is available from the Middle East to the Hindu Kush.

Yes, and we haven't a clue how many there are, let alone the number of those who could easily be recruited.

I read the WaPo article linked by Instapundit about all the arrests in pakistan recently. They said about 100 in the last few days with 18 or so identified as al Qaeda.

I recall at least one instance where Islamists were running a traning camp in rural Virginia, and another where British Muslims were being brought to the 'States for weapons training - can't remember where they were training, but I dount it was Manhattan. It's good to hear that folks are checking up on their neighbors and all, but I think I'm correct in my assertion that, in some rural areas, the sound of gunfire coming from an out of the way abandoned gravel pit on a Sunday afternoon would not be considered remarkable. This is not meant as a dis to rural America - rather, it's generally one of the good points about living there.

Ah, Richard, that's just silly. Islam has four major traditions (Shi'a, Sunni, Sufi, and Ishmaelian) and has been a center of enlightenment in the world in the past. (Remember that it was Isabella and Ferdinand who threw out the Jews in previously-Moorish Andaluz. They wouldn't have been there to throw out if Islam hadn't been tolerant at the time.) And Christianity has its adherents to the "directly received Word of God" theory as well.

"Terrye — P.J. O'Rourke has pointed out that celebrities, especially Hollywood celebrities, have absolutely no idea what money can do"

Before signing on with P.J. you need to read his review in today's Book section of the LA Times (no link available without paying, unfortunately).

I'm with you on the matter of what do we call the "war". Its a war on terrorism, the Islamofascist variety is merely the latest and most virulent straing.

I agree with you guys on the matter of trying to hide out in blue-state, big sky country. In today's America the best places to blend in and hide out are the large metropolitan areas. That is where the locals have a well developed sense of not paying attention. Those are the areas where an effort is required to get people to have a "block watch" mentality. While the metro areas make it easy to hide in plain sight and move freely without attracting attention, they don't lend themselves well to establishing jihadi training camps. One might slip off into the blue-state hinterlands to test one's bomb making skills but if one makes a big noise in the red-state areas somebody is going to arrive to check things out.

Charlie of Colorado, Richard is not silly. Islam is unreformable because it is perfect. It is not politically reformable because it is politically perfect, and it is not theologically reformable because there is one God and Mohammed is his prophet.

You mention that there are Christians who believe that the Bible is the infallible Word of God, and there are.

What it has to do with anything other than to confuse those easily confused I can't say.

But, Charlie, for a friend, I'll clear it up: Christianity is not a political system. Christianity has a robust tradition of ongoing revelation. Thus, Christianity needs no political reformation, and is theologically reformed, no doubt, every second of every minute by somebody somewhere being seized by the Spirit and speaking in tongues, or having Revealed to them that God does after favor the recruitment of black athletes to formerly white religious schools.

Islam, as you say, is divided into (more than four) several schools. The most prominent hates, despises, and performs remarkable cruelties on the next most prominent school, a bunch of apostates who do not believe that any of the Sunni caliphs were legitimate.

That second school, Shi'a, consoles itself with hatred of the most prominent school for stealing the caliphate 1200 years ago, and comforts itself with the knowledge that the 12th imam, now nearing 900 years of age, is hiding in a cave and will at some date of his choosing emerge to lead victorious Shi'ites into the establishment of a caliphate in the name of Ali, who was bamboozled 1200 years ago out of his rightful spot as Mohammed's successor. Shi'a is first and foremost concerned with its own victimhood and revenge.

The other schools believe even more bizarre things. But they all believe that the Koran and the Hadith are all there is and all there ever will be.

And that's why Islam cannot be reformed. The alleged "golden ages" of Islam were periods when the Muslims conquered developed societies and learned their ideas, until the mullahs put a stop to it.

August 7, 2004: Dangers of Dawa

Comments

Post a comment

Email This Post