Engaged – Chapter 3

Posted by johnhouk on Sep 24, 2009
 Gary H. Johnson, Jr. writing for United Against Islamic Supremacism has sent what can be considered the third chapter of Engaged. At SlantRight.com you can read chapters one and two HERE and HERE.

When the “Engaged” chapters are complete, Johnson is considering entitling the book form “The Elemental Struggle.” Of course the title is not etched in stone but it is something to look forward to when the Johnson/Carter engaging makes it to book form.

JRH 9/24/09
**************************************
Engaged – Chapter 3

Posted by huntingnasrallah
September 21, 2009
By Gary H. Johnson, Jr. and Chris Carter
United Against Islamic Supremacism

The Elemental Struggle of our times is exposing Islamic Supremacy. The following is a letter exchange between two Americans, struggling to make sense of the 9/12 era.

September 6, 2009

Gary,

I too found the Allawi quote quite interesting.

From a standpoint of Western understanding, the tolerance that exists between differing Muslim sects could signify that the sects coexist while neither side prohibits the religious practices of the other. Accommodation seems to be more hospitable, perhaps even representing a reconciliation of differences. But the quote shows that there is a vast difference between Eastern and Western understanding.

One thing to bear in mind is that we are dealing with a religion which literally means “submission.” Attempting to comprehend Islam with a Western framework of understanding will prove very misleading, and I believe is what has lead to the crisis Western civilization is in. As Allawi implied: Tolerance assumes supremacy. We are dealing with supremacists, and as a country that founded itself on principles meant to eliminate supremacy, that too can be a roadblock to our understanding of the nature of the conflict.

Since the commandments found in the Qur’an contradict themselves so frequently, it is difficult for someone who hasn’t devoted years of study to make sense of what the final say is. If Sunni Muslims are to “acknowledge the legitimacy and rights of minority groups” as Allawi states, how can it be that the concept of the “invitation,” or Dawa, holds sway? I understand the concept of abrogation decides which of Muhammad’s contradicting commandments are lawful. Which then is the right one: The “invitation,” which commands that Non-Muslims are to convert to Islam, be subjugated, or killed – or the acknowledgment of legitimacy and rights of minority groups?

But in addressing the differing East/West mindsets: The “permanent arrangement which implies the creation of a recognized and legitimate space for other religious and doctrinal groups” that Allawi mentions gives me the impression of Muslims setting aside space for Christians, Jews, Hindus, etc. with the religions coexisting peacefully. I don’t see many examples of such space in Africa, Pakistan, or Saudi Arabia – where non-Muslim places of worship are burned accompanied by the persecution and brutal murders of their worshipers. In fact, dozens of countries are either completely Muslim, like Saudi Arabia, or are approaching complete Muslim occupation. It is also worth noting that Islam is neither accommodating nor tolerant of the nation of Israel.

The conclusion I have come to is that perhaps the accommodation Allawi mentions is actually the Da’wa itself.

Unfortunately, it seems that there is a great – and perhaps unbridgeable – gap between Muslims and the West. Western cultures – the United States in particular – desire freedom, while Muslims by nature are pre-programmed for submission to the will of Allah. We embrace tolerance while Islam rejects it. We believe that all men are created equal, while Islam has its dhimmitude. While we recognize the inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, that too stands in direct opposition of Islam. Our Civil War was fought in part to eliminate slavery. America then continued the fight against supremacist groups for a hundred years.

This leaves me with the question: Where is the room for compromise between liberty and tyranny? Where is the room for compromise between submission to Allah and freedom of religion?

It seems clear to me that the clash of civilizations has reached fever pitch after centuries of differences have become unavoidable. Rather than a legal system and government of the people, by the people, and for the people, we are to live under a legal system set forth fourteen hundred years ago in which rape victims are to be stoned, enemies are to be mutilated, and non-believers are to be crucified.

If Americans are to be free and equal, if we do not wish to depart from the inalienable rights codified at this nation’s founding, then we are left with no choice but to defend our principles, as we had to fight supremacy and tyranny at the hands of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan in the 1940’s.

Chris Carter

P/S: Although you did give mention to the Barbary Wars, you overlooked my question posed to you in our previous letter regarding Islamic piracy. I also would like to discuss the issue of slavery.
______________________________
September 12, 2009

Chris,

I apologize for taking so long to respond. I have been building a new website where I am focusing on creating a baseline for researching the Afghanistan/Pakistan sphere. I call it The AfPak Reader, and right now I am in the process of “boxing Roggio”. I am studying the Bill Roggio Archives from the Long War Journal, specifically the Summer 2009 work he has put forward on the web. I am taking his Afghanistan and Pakistan work, which is filled with useful links, and breaking out the links that give a full picture of the situation. More or less, the links within his works are a source index, but it takes those who are researching forever to click on a link, read it, then return back and click another one, repeating the process eight or nine times in a story. As far as researching the phenomenon of the Taliban and al Qaeda, because the topic is so involved, the internet is bogged down by load times – perhaps I just prefer books.

The reason I have broken out the links and categorized them into “mini AfPak readers” called “Mainlines” is to establish a narrative of the topic, grounding the complexity in concrete events with contextual explanation, that we might identify and profile our enemies with precision instead of levying generalities that are received across the Atlantic as stereotyping. Once I have compiled Roggio’s LWJ Summer 2009 work, I will have a baseline of research from which anyone can begin the process of building an understanding of the situation our troops are facing in the AfPak.

In your letter of August 2nd, you stated that the first thing America should have done in the wake of 9/11 was to assess and define the enemy we were facing. In terms of defining, mapping and identifying the threats to America, the process I am putting forward on The AfPak Reader wordpress blog is a necessary surge in the challenging task of defining our enemy and understanding the terrain.

Your September 6 letter deserves a full response.

I was pleased to see your quick grasp of Islamic Accommodation between the sects of Islam. In your September 6 letter, you state, “the tolerance that exists between differing Muslim sects could signify that the sects coexist while neither side prohibits the religious practices of the other. Accommodation seems to be more hospitable, perhaps even representing a reconciliation of differences.” I found it remarkably astute, considering that the Allawi passage continues in sync with your reading.

Following the sufferance of toleration, Allawi talks of the relation of the Sunni and Shia, saying “The Sunni-Shia relationship throughout most of Islamic history was one of accommodation rather than toleration, in spite of important theological differences.” Indeed, the majority Sunni did “accommodate” the Shia with a legally recognized space throughout Islamic History; albeit, the differing sects and schools under the Sunni veil also slaughtered the Shia regularly when the Shia were perceived by the Sunni to have violated the sovereign space arrangement.

Islamic Accommodation demands the reasoning mind to re-evaluate internally accepted truth. Though you once believed that mutual tolerance was the way to achieve peace, you must now take it on faith that an accommodation is necessary. The purpose of Jihad is to destabilize reason’s ability to properly gage the magnitude of the threat it is facing – conquest is achieved through deception, war. Sacrificing pawns is the nature of Chess – pawns can’t retreat.

You ask, “Where is the room for compromise between Liberty and Tyranny?” To this I would respond that there is not room for compromise between the free and the slaver; however, there is room for an intellectual exchange, in which Liberty enumerates its reasoned grievances, mental and social, lists its verifiable damages, material and psychological, and issues a sovereign challenge, exposing the moral failings and ethical precedents of the offending Tyranny. In terms of reason, the proper relation between Liberty and Tyranny is one of well-measured resentment.

Having said this, I would note that your reading of Israel as a state which is not accommodated or tolerated by its Muslim neighbors is also correct; though, this does not say that Islam is not willing to accommodate the Jews in an Islamic Palestine.

The Arabs and Muslims reject what they refer to as the “Zionist Entity.” The nature of the narrative against the Zionist entity (the Little Satan) holds that Israel was created to give Jews a homeland without concern over the Palestinians who were pushed off of their land. The narrative continues with the charge that the Jewish leaders are plotting to dominate the region from the Mediterranean to the Euphrates through imperial means, with Western backing, particularly the United States (the Great Satan). However, I think it best to reserve judgment on this score…until a more opportune time, when we might have space enough to discuss at length the narrative which accuses the sovereign state of Israel of being an imperialist Bulwark of Western interests in the Muslim world.

What is important to note, now, is the fact that the sovereignty – the borders, laws, rights and liberties – of Israel is under challenge.

Beyond Israel, world peace, itself, hinges on confronting and defying Islamic Accommodation.

On June 10th, 1963, President John F. Kennedy gave a speech at the commencement exercises of American University in Washington D.C. The specter in JFKs era was Communism and the red menace out of the Soviet Union; but, what plagued our young president was the realization that Total war in a nuclear age meant mutually assured destruction. In the charged environment, at the height of the Cold War, he spoke of peace. “World peace, like community peace, does not require that each man love his neighbor,” Kennedy said, “it requires only that they live together with mutual tolerance, submitting their disputes to a just and peaceful settlement.”

The act of compromise can mean (1) to settle by concessions, (2) to expose or make liable to danger, suspicion, or disrepute, or (3) to pledge mutually. This, my American Heritage has taught me.

When presented under the bedoui tent of accommodation, compromise does not hold a mutual pledge as a possible outcome. Indeed, without the incentive of a mutual pledge, no compromise can be profitable. Therefore, for those who hold to individual liberty as the natural state of humanity (for the defenders of Liberty) to enter into a negotiation or engagement with a Muslim or a Community of Islam with the intention of achieving a just compromise, the result will inevitably expose liberty to the dangers inherent in the supremacy of Allah’s Rights – cultural, ethical, individual, and national sovereignty is overthrown in an instant.

The attitude of Islamic accommodation is evidenced in Dore Gold’s release The Fight for Jerusalem. In a discussion about the 1993 meeting of the minds between Israel and the Palestinians, a local Palestinian leader named Faisal al-Husseini states happily, “in the Oslo Accords it was established that the status of Jerusalem is open to negotiations on the final arrangement, and the moment you say yes to negotiations, you are ready for compromise.” What is up for grabs? In Oslo, the destiny of Jerusalem’s sovereign arrangement was placed back on the negotiation table 45 years after Israel declared and won her sovereignty. Why is he happy? Future Israeli leaders, who seek negotiations on Jerusalem’s sovereign arrangement, must aim for a compromise to achieve what they will perceive to be a just and beneficial settlement…while Palestinians, with full religious support, will reject mutual tolerance and demand that Shariah Law be adhered to in all future legal arrangements and discussions – this, as a merciful accommodation.

In this light, what just and peaceful settlement is possible for Israel in a negotiation with those who would reject mutual tolerance? Knowing what you now know about Islamic accommodation, what are the prospects of world peace in an age of Islamic (demographic) ascendancy, if we are met to set about the immoral task of compromising on the necessity of mutual tolerance? Compromising tolerance in the face of Islamic accommodation is the act of accepting dhimmitude. In what Shariah Court will the disputes of the dhimmi find justice, I ask?

Reason is murdered when compromise rejects tolerance.

A great unequal battle faces those who would forge a new daybreak, struggling for peace against such accommodation. In the war of perception, accommodation is an attractive deception. But he who chooses by his own volition to barter away sovereignty for peace, will awaken darkly to the recognition of his chains.

Islamic accommodation is attractive precisely due to language and the form of its Da’wa.

Da’wa, in general, is the missionary activity of Islam. It can mean “to call” or “to summon” or “to invite” when found in the Koran. Missionary activity in the modern age has ramped up with the rise of the internet and mass communication. Da’wa as an Arabic term tends to mean “to call upon” as in a prayer to a god. In this sense, the da’wa is a vital and vibrant part of Muslim piety, for it is the invocation of a prayer to Allah. However, fundamentalist Muslims tend to see da’wa as a proselytizing activism, and their mosques and madrassas are actually tools of outreach and social welfare designed to spread the influence of Muhammad’s teachings and Allah’s Laws.

Matthew Levitt, in his book Hamas: Politics, Charity, and Terrorism in the Service of Jihad notes that “social service institutions function as an ideal tool used by Islamists to radicalize and recruit Muslim youth.” In this vein, da’wa, in practice, delivers a message of sectarian purity which can be molded to meet the propaganda needs of identity politics and to radicalize a ready crop of listeners. Indeed, in conflict zones or in poorly governed, corrupt or failed states, the social welfare found in the da’wa of the Mosque network provides what the defunct power cannot – food, clothing, housing, opportunity and education – leading naturally to declarations of illegitimacy for the power of the state and cries of Allahu Akhbar as the sovereignty of Allah is championed, politically, by the disaffected communities.

In terms of Islamic accommodation, when the Da’wa of Islam is issued toward an infidel, it is a “summoning” to the supreme truth of Allah’s pen, which taught men what they knew not. Supreme truth, ultimate knowledge, the source of true power and law, the source of sovereignty – these all – are what the Mother Book miraculously provided the world according to Islam. All law and order and sovereignty that came before the Koran’s perfect message are part of the age of ignorance, the age of jahali. So, in terms of the principle of abrogation, the Koran overrides all previous scriptures in value, including the Torah and the New Testament, which were corrupted by Satan over time, through improper translation of God’s laws and through the imperfect interpretation of the fallible leaders of the faiths – Satan is the great disorderer of Muhammad’s straight path.

According to the invitation to Islam, Muhammad was the final prophet in the Abrahamic prophetic tradition, the seal of the prophets, the last of Allah’s messengers to humanity. He was prompted to “Read” or “Recite” directly from Allah’s Mother Book by the Angel Gabriel. And, though Muhammad was an illiterate man, he could read the words of Allah’s Supreme guidance…and the words of the scribes, who wrote down his revelations, were written in plain Arabic, the celestial language of Allah’s final revelations to mankind – a complete Warning to humanity of the coming final Hour of judgment.

But in truth, if you really want to understand the true nature of the language and form of the invitation to Islam, the Call, the Da’wa, you must allow your reason to find itself in a foreign setting, devoid of the comforts of cell phones and internet links, automobiles, processed foods and air conditioning. 9/11 was said by many to be the result of a failure of imagination.

Therefore, in this triumph of imagination, you must become, in your mind, a farmer living in a village of some 300 souls over 500 years ago. Your imagination must place you into the position of a spokesman and elder of a village on the edge of Christendom. For generations the Christian faith of your lineage has been unchallenged. Your village is twenty miles from the nearest garrison; and, as night is falling, you hear the pounding of hooves and the chain-chink of battledress beyond your citrus grove to the South.
____________

Dogs begin to whine aimlessly in distress; horses grow restless in their stables; more and more villagers come to your side as you stand on the edge of the unknown. Cut off, due to simple geography, without communication with your primary source of protection – aware of your situation – you face the horde approaching your village with a tight hold on your fear.

Addressing the crowd, you say “we know not who is upon us or what legion. But we will meet them with kindness and hospitality…with so few to fight by my side, God help us if they are set upon battle. Prepare the horses. Three riders must speed North to the garrison. Hail the village elders along the way and tell them…a force of a thousand or more advances from the South. Slaughter ten goats and set the fires. We will feast with our southern neighbors and learn of their cause and master.”

In the amber light of a dying sun, the slope of your land allows you to see hundreds of warriors riding toward your village at a confident pace, thirty abreast along a road designed for no more than three riders side by side…and the column stretches and widens upon the horizon.

Signs of concern had already awakened you to the impending possibility of danger. The previous night, a young boy, bloody and tired, arrived at your door. He was mumbling the word “Mohamedans” over and over. Unable to pry information out of the shaking, feverish lad, you had sent riders south to inquire as to trouble, but none had returned. The farmers from the East and the West had not arrived to the market in over a week.

Terror grips you as the near grove comes to life with flaming torches and horses, glinting spear tips, and rows and rows of bows. The tales of slaves who escaped Islam colored council fire meetings throughout your life with the ruthless exploits of the Mohamedans in battle.

“Light the torches and prepare yourselves for a celebration. Draw water and break out the feed. Their horses will need care.” You feign control in your instructions, though chance’s fickle wand will wield your destiny, you fear. The pounding of the hooves is an echo within you now and it grows and grows.

Abruptly, the column of Muslim riders halts just outside the village. From the wall of men, one solitary rider removes the cloth wrapped over his nose and mouth, nudging his steed forward. With a downward gaze, the rider nods to you, “Peace be upon you. With respect, who is the leader of this…village of Rum?”

Though you respond clearly, the halting of the ranks in succession, and the rumbling earth drowned out your response. “Peace unto you. I am the chieftain. We are but a small village, but I have ordered a feast for your generals.”

“Where are your guards? Does Rum not keep you well defended?”

“We trust in God, to safeguard our passage, sir. Praise be to Him, indeed. It is not every day one is allowed the grace of learning the mind of one’s neighbor. Your presence is a blessing to us. I have long yearned to learn of your Master and Faith.”

“Allahu Akbar. Allah is the greatest source of defense. You are indeed people of the book. The Prophet Muhammad, Peace be upon Him, has taught us this lesson in word and deed. I would be honored to attend your feast, Christian.”

Cut off, with no defense, you have said “Yes” to negotiations. But you are not proud. Your faith has taught you humility in all things. If need be, to save the lives of those who have been entrusted to your keeping and care…you will convert as an example…and pay any price that you might worship Christ in the private keeps of your heart, even if you submit to Muhammad, publicly, due to circumstance.

The Muslim spokesman smiles as he drinks and eats with his Generals in your dining hall…his men encamped across the countryside. He looks upon you with a level gaze and says, “I command 3,000 men. If I were a bandit, I could control your village with less than 30.”

“We are well suited to defend ourselves from raids.”

“Do you pay taxes to Rum?”

“Why yes, Rum is our protector, a quarter of our yield is presented as tribute.”

“That is why I am here, Christian. It is puzzling that a master would impose himself on a subject without offering the security promised in the acceptance of an annual duty. By the prophet, I am here to offer you and your village protection…and security. This small contingent of men under my command is nothing compared to the Army of Islam; yet, I would wager you have never witnessed one so massive nor one so obedient to command. I would extend to you my protection, and Allah’s protection.”

“Can Muhammad’s god protect a Christian?”

“We worship the same God. His name is Allah. Al Quran says that Allah made men and angels solely to worship Him. Do your scriptures not teach this truth, Christian?”

“Our scriptures teach us that Christ died for the sins of all Mankind, that God sacrificed his only son that we might all achieve the Kingdom of Heaven. In Jesus, we pray. In remembrance of Jesus do we break bread and drink wine. God created Mankind that we might glorify his law, that we might inherit the kingdom through His grace.”

“Do you speak the language of Jesus? Do you speak the language of Abraham? Is it not then a truth that you do not know what Jesus actually said upon his cross? For hundreds of years your Christian Councils have argued over the nature of divinity in Christ, yes? Your faith in Christ is admirable – Muhammad revered Jesus. When Muhammad smashed all of the idols in the Kaaba, he did not destroy the image of Jesus, for it was dear to him as a fellow prophet. The tragedy of the world is the fact that all of Allah’s prophets were tormented for their desire to warn the people of their transgressions against Allah’s laws. However, Al Quran teaches us that those who claim that Allah is made of three – the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit – disorder the straight path in Allah’s sight. Allah is One. There is no god but Allah. Allah has never begotten a son.”

“Christ taught that men should treat others as they wish to be treated. I have not traveled South to your door to deny the divinity of Muhammad’s teachings, have I?”

“Did Jesus not chase the money changers from the house of prayer? He warned of sinning against the laws of God. Al Quran of Muhammad, too, is such a warning. Would you wish Jesus had not traveled to the Temple to cleanse it of sin? Christian, your scriptures guide you to treat others as you would want to be treated. We, in Islam, follow a similar teaching. Muhammad, peace be upon him, in the early years of Medina said ‘And from among you there should be a party who invite to good and enjoin the right and forbid the wrong. And these are they who are successful.’ (3:104) Al Quran is a warning for those who would disobey the laws of Allah, for the ‘Lord is most Generous, Who taught by the pen, Taught man what he knew not.’”

“Thank you for the warning, my Muslim neighbor. Enjoining the right and forbidding the wrong seems a noble pursuit. But why do you travel with a contingent of warriors if this is your message?”

“My party has come to invite you to Good, Christian. Your current masters are not able to provide you with protection, yet Rum charges you a quarter of your yield. If you were to convert to Islam, the levy for protection would be one tenth of that under your current terms with Rum. Since there is no compulsion in religion in Islam, we will accommodate your right to remain Christians if you declare allegiance to the Caliph at a similar rate to your current levy. Your allegiance to the Caliph would allow you a contingent of protection such as that encamped throughout your countryside. Now, I ask, can Rum’s garrison to your North provide one tenth such security for your family? We are both people of the book. I offer you and your people protection and accommodation.”
_____________

So, Chris, when you ask, “Where is the room for compromise between submission to Allah and freedom of religion?” I would have to respond, the room for compromise is based on the level of support you have in terms of communication. In the example narrative above, protection was offered. This protection tax becomes the dhimmitude. Nothing is mentioned about the fact that if the affronted Christians or Jews do decide to accept the terms of Islamic protection and pay the Jizya tax, they will become second class, sub humans who recognize the supremacy of Allah but refuse to accept Submission and therefore deserve to be treated with enmity and contempt. Nothing is mentioned about the fact that the strong sons of every village are whisked away into what is called dervishme in which they are trained as Janissary conscript warriors and brainwashed to accept the supremacy of Jihad.

The above example is a triumph of imagination, for it represents the language and form of Da’wa and Islamic accommodation. This methodology is the gateway to dhimmitude, the gateway to slavery. Converting to Islam is a way to save ten to twenty percent in taxes. So, on the subject of the history of the conquests of Islamic Empires, the reason our Western textbooks claim that the conquests were relatively peaceful was due to the fact that communication and travel times were so primitive. Cut off, the tribal and village leaders facing a massive horde were more likely to surrender and submit than to fight. And those that surrendered and harbored in their heart their traditional fate became hypocrites and were butchered with Koranic legal backing if they ever attempted to resist the dictates of Shariah Law.

Dawa, the summons to Islam, forced those who stood in the path of the Muslim advance through the centuries to make a fateful choice. Those who were headstrong and retained their faith would, after years of discrimination and abuse, find their numbers dwindling as more and more of their congregation accepted the Islamic faith. Two or three generations would pass, and the grandchildren of those early converts who relented control of their reason and integrity would know nothing other than the blessings of Allah and the security of the collective Umma, effectively breeding out the dissenters.

The Dawa, the Islamic Accommodation, lays the groundwork for a totalitarian takeover of the socioeconomic system of a culture which submits to Islam or, docile, accepts dhimmitude. Jihad is waged on those who refuse the options of converting or paying the jizya tax. Why? Jihad is waged on the holdouts, because they arrogantly refuse to accept the Supremacy of Allah and the Koran as their constitutional benchmark of justice and truth, preferring to remain in a state of jahaliya; that is, in a state of rebellion against the limits ordained by Allah.

In the war of perception, accommodation is an attractive deception. But he who chooses by his own volition to barter away sovereignty for peace, will awaken darkly to the recognition of his chains.

In the modern era, mass communication has slowed the advance of the literalist Muslims who seek to wage jihad against the West. In this regard, the freedoms of the press and of speech are paramount in creating a unified response from the Western intellectual world, declaring independence from the tyranny of Shariah law. The Establishment Clause of the United States Constitution guarantees no law will be made respecting the establishment of a religion; and since this law is absolute, and the freedoms of press and speech are protected, the only thing slowing a full sail intellectual revolt against the injustices of Shariah Law is the multicultural whitewashing of Islam’s slaver past by the Free Media.

The economic history of Islam is a black hole. Those who hold the freedom of speech must demand the right to communicate their findings on the slaver past of Islam as findings present themselves to the researchers, studying the intricacies of the past and present. At present, with the rise of the internet, twenty four hour news programs, daily, weekly and monthly periodicals and journals, mass communication has closed the necessity of “compromising” on the freedom of religion in the face of Islamic Accommodation. However, the rules of the game can change quickly if the freedom of speech or the press is augmented by the intellectual elite waging a cultural jihad against Liberty and Reason.

Unfortunately, since those who are fighting for the implementation of Shariah Law are well funded and well organized in their academic posts, influential think tanks, and Non-Governmental Organizations, the press in the West has been assaulted by the narratives of the apologists and dhimmis for so long that when those who would rise as free men and women of reason against the specter of Shariah Law in Europe or America and attempt to gain an intellectual foothold for the espousal of their countercultural ideas, their reasoned efforts are omitted from the published record and forwarded to the trash bin.

The Power of Omission is the chief obstacle in defying Islamic Supremacism in the age of mass communication. The deafening silence of the omission is the most damaging aspect of Islamic supremacism’s current onslaught on Western Liberty to those who would mount a defense of Western sovereignty. The editors of major newspapers rationalize not publishing material of new thinkers because they are not sufficiently qualified with a PHD or have an extensive background in Arab or Middle Eastern studies in the folds of the current collegiate MESA environment.

At the same time, the deck is stacked against gaining entry to the mix, since the graduate schools offering the courses necessary to achieve a modicum of expertise are unavailable for those who are not well versed in either Hebrew or Arabic. That Jews represent a large contingent in the frontlines of the intellectual battle against Islamic supremacism is not a mystery – graduate schools accept Hebrew as a gateway language to the study of the region. In full, the prerequisite requirement of proficiency in a Middle Eastern language for entrance in graduate studies programs of the United States places Westerners, newly awakening to the threat, at a disadvantage in terms of competing in the realm of academic ideas, since the Arabic and Islamic attendees to Western universities dominate the tenor and direction of the debates and place this effort directly into campus activism from UCLA to Georgetown to Columbia to Harvard via organizations like MSA. The voices of the people face a wall, silenced by a discriminating media standard.

Western engagement with the Muslim world is dominated by think tanks and NGOs which hold political agendas. Magazines like Newsweek become agenda and influence mouthpieces of foundations and institutions which are gaining in government backing and financing. Try to get published in the National Interest or Foreign Policy magazines…try to get published on the topic of Islam – it won’t happen unless you are tied to an influence peddling NGO or juiced in to the MESA academic scene and touting the talking point line.

Voiced dissent, then, in the confrontation with Islamic Supremacism and contemporary Jihad, is an exercise in rejection for the intellectual vanguard of the West. The deck is stacked, marked, and juiced. The man of reason on the street is short stacked, left hoping for a miracle card down the river.

The form of the Da’wa is telling. In the triumphant example above, it should be reckoned that the first step in the process of summoning infidels to Islam was not to say “Convert, pay the jizya or die”. The first step was claiming that the Christian God and Allah were one in the same. In this first step, Islam and the advocates of Shariah Law have won the day completely.

This complete victory can best be seen in modern translation of common speak. When Arabic or Islamic writers speak of Allah, the word Allah is immediately translated into English as God. There is zero moral equivalence of the God of Islam and the God of the Old and New Testaments. Yet, the translators of today continually accept the interchangeable nature of the words “Allah” and “God”. This is tragic. Moreover, to Muslims, it is considered a sin to translate the Koran from the plain Arabic into any other language. The supremacy of plain Arabic is a tenet of Islam. Therefore, when Western translators fail to maintain the separation between the words “Allah” and “God” they are committing intellectual treason, submitting their will and reason to the supremacy of Allah and Islam.

Now, as to your post script, you are correct – I did leave piracy and slavery in the shadows. In your second letter of this Elemental Struggle you asked if piracy, as found in the Gulf of Aden, today, could be seen as a fundamentalist type of jihad. To this, I would remind you that in your letter of August 2nd, you stated that “terrorism is a tactic, not a target.” Piracy, too, is a tactic. Terrorism and Piracy are both tactics of Jihad. Moreover, in terms of conquest, enslavement is also a tactic, until it becomes a custom. Terrorism, piracy and slavery are all tactics of Jihad.

The United States of America, since its founding and before was affronted by Islamic Pirates and the slave trade, which had its nucleus in Muslim lands. The Barbary Wars was waged by President Thomas Jefferson and his successors against the Berber pirates of the Mediterranean. And without the slave markets of Islam, the United States would not have inherited slavery.

The geopolitical realities of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries were bound by the state-sponsored Piracy of Islam’s Caliphs. The word “passport” was derived from the “protection” tax levied by Muslim lands, which allowed travelers and ship owners to pass from port to port throughout the Mediterranean without fear of being accosted by pirates. All of the European countries which wanted access to the Silk Road were willing to pay exhorbitant fees to Muslim Pirate Warlords to make sure that its ships and citizens would not be enslaved or kidnapped for a ransom.

What most people don’t understand in the West today is that the American trade and diplomatic vessels had to contend with the Berber pirates following the American Revolution precisely because Britain’s protection fees no longer applied to American ships. Europe, in effect, due to its inability to police the waters of the Atlantic and Mediterranean fell victim to a massive extortion and racketeering ring. The United States, founded on the principles of individual liberty, property rights and capitalism, rejected the notion that Europe had accepted – piracy was a threat to free trade. War, therefore, was levied against piracy in a variety of ways in the name of Liberty and Sovereignty, beginning with the exploits of William Eaton, the first covert operative in America’s history, who, with eight Marines, responded to the Pasha of Tripoli’s kidnapping and extortion tactics with a covert assault mission. The 1805 mission of William Eaton is chronicled admirably well by Richard Zacks in his book The Pirate Coast. The text should be required reading in History classrooms across our country, for it exposes the grievances and damages that led to the United States’ first stand against Islamic Mercantilism.

Islam is a chiefly mercantile faith; yet, the economic history of Islam is notably absent in studies of World History. Since Muslims emulate Muhammad, the socio-economic realities of the faith are based on the economic system of Arabia in the age of Muhammad.

Geopolitically, Mercantilism ruled socio-economics from the age of Muhammad through the age of Enlightenment and the birth of the United States. Mercantilism holds that the nation which amasses the most wealth can put to field the biggest and most well resourced army. Wealth, in Mercantilism, is, a static thing, scarce; so, the Mercantilist, in order to acquire an ever expanding source of wealth must hold to an ever expanding colonial empire. There is only so much wheat, so much timber, so much salt, so much metal…and whoever owns the most territory can amass the most wealth and power.

The mercantilist mentality led to the colonial systems of the Dutch, the Portuguese, the Spanish, the British, and eventually the Japanese. Imperialism based on mercantilism naturally gives birth to Piracy as a weapon of statecraft, since the philosophy of Mercantilism bases its morality on taking wealth via expansion rather than creating wealth via property laws of the free market. The English had privateers, no? In the subjugated lands, sovereignty is in flux, boundaries are in question. Law and order in the colonies and prospective acquisitions of an empire, then, were flexible; and, in that libertine environment, pirate raids and activity were sponsored by the head of the imperial state to instill terror and to guarantee that the colonials would eventually fully submit to the public good of taxation out of the sovereign protection afforded to the colonies by the empire. Socialism, Fascism, Communism are each modern variants of the Mercantile Economic system.

Mercantilism and Piracy are enshrined in the Islamic faith. Year 1 of the Muslim calendar is called the year of the Hegira. The Hegira (or hijra) represents the birth of the Islamic Empire, for Muhammad broke away from the Mecca tribes and established a base for his followers in Medina. By year 3, the Muslims were considered outlaws for their raiding of Mecca’s Caravans. For a decade, Muhammad preached the initial verses of the Koran in Mecca. The fact that Muhammad was preaching monotheism was seen as a threat to Meccan trade.

Mecca was home of the Kaaba, which played host to as many idols as days in the year. Mecca, was a place of pilgrimage for worshipers of all faiths, who sought to both pay homage to their idol Gods and trade goods. Muhammad began preaching about an idolless God and began scolding pilgrims for their false worship and idolatry. The elite leaders of Mecca were annoyed by this – Muhammad was bad for business. 365 different idols in the Kaaba represented 365 tribal faiths which could come and trade and worship.

Since the Meccans were in the middle of the desert and the Kaaba was their main claim to fame, the elites felt that the idol worshipers were their main market. Muhammad had to be silenced. So, after years of taunts and harrassment, the elite tribal leaders shucked him and his followers into a ghetto on the outskirts of town – an ancient Gaza – effectively quarantining the poisonous message which could threaten trade from the market place of ideas. Muhammad sent envoys out to surrounding kings and cities to find a benefactor who was not so worried about the idol trade and was willing to accept Islam. It was not long before the leaders of the tribes of Medina (a city made up of Jewish and Arab tribes) sent Muhammad a message, informing him that they would accept his Kingship if he could come to Medina and settle the disputes and stop the tribal feuds of the city.

The leaders of Mecca found out about the entreaty and were alarmed at the possibility of Muhammad rising to the head of a city such as Medina. The tribal leaders of Mecca plotted to kill Muhammad, yet he and his friends escaped Mecca’s scheming assassination attempts and made it to Medina…in a flight from the danger of the Meccan political scene. In Arabic, the word hijra means “flight”. Out of anger, the Meccan leadership imprisoned and tortured the Muslims who did not make it out of Mecca, and burned and looted the houses and property of the Muslims who had left, including Muhammad’s.

Learning of the destruction of the property of his followers, and firmly established as the patriarch of Medina, Muhammad determined that the best way to achieve satisfaction would be to raid the caravan routes of the Meccans.

In Muhammad’s day, caravan raiding was considered a sport. In Arabia, opportunists would cut off a caravan that was not well defended and force the caravan leader to submit to the theft. The most gallant and chivalrous raiders of the desert were the ones who could achieve a piece of the cargo without the shedding of blood. In time, a system of “protection taxes” were developed by caravan leaders that claimed to be able to navigate the deserts and at the same time protect the cargo from raids, through reputation or through agreements with tribal chiefs.

Often times, wealthy Meccan elites would pool their money into a caravan from Syria or surrounding markets. When Muhammad’s band of followers descended on the caravans of Mecca, the wealthy elites were literally up in arms to defend their source of income as well as their dominance in the region. The verses of the Koran which originated in the post Hegira Medina period laid down the religious justification for piracy and war on the idolaters of Mecca’s mercantile system. Jihad, then, was born of Allah’s sanction of piracy as a just cause. And in effect, Muhammad’s Jihads laid siege to the market of Mecca, and Allah would demand a Monopoly on religious authority.

What is Jihad? Jihad is an ideological nexus of deceitful concepts like Da’wa, Jahaliya, and Abrogation. Its methodology is bound by the limits laid down in the Koran and Shariah Law. Its tactics include terror, piracy, enslavement, and taqiya (dissembling truth). To Muslims, the Koran is the source of all knowledge and truth. All authority in Islam is designed to usher in an age in which Allah’s Word is all high. Jihad has a trigger – and that trigger is the Institution of al Hisba, derived from the injunction “enjoin good and forbid evil”.

The concept of abrogation seems like a temporal construct in Islamic Supremacy – the latter Medina verses seem to abrogate the Meccan verses of the Koran. Muslim scholars have long held that Muhammad’s last word on a subject is the final word of Allah. However, since no chronological Koran exists, Western readers without a full understanding of the contexts of Muhammad’s Jihads are at a loss to determine the temporal value of the Sword verses of the Koran as they relate to Jihad’s modern face.

As to slavery, it is hard for Westerners, today, to see how the slave trade inherited by America originated in the caravan mentality of the Mercantile age. But what must be understood about slavery is that it is inextricably linked with Shariah Law. Last year, I read the book Legacy of Jihad by Andrew Bostom. In Part 7, subtitled Jihad Slavery, K.S. Lal notes that according to T.P. Hughes’ Dictionary of Islam (produced in the 1890s), “Slavery is in complete harmony with the spirit of Islam…That Muhammad ameliorated the condition of the slave, as it existed under the heathen law of Arabia, we cannot doubt; but it is equally certain that the Arabian legislator intended it to be a permanent institution.” Later in the treatise, Lal continues with Hughes, “The Slavery of Islam is interwoven with the Law of marriage, the Law of sale, and the Law of inheritance, of the system, and its abolition would strike at the very foundation of the code of Muhaminadanism.”

The Muslim nations of Mauritania and Saudi Arabia did not officially end slavery until the 1960s; and, the practice of slavery is still strong, though now unmentionably underground in Islamic society.

The United States of America has been at war with Islam’s Shariah Law since its founding. Following the Barbary Wars, we experienced the Civil War in which the slavery brought to America from the Muslim slave markets found itself stopped cold with Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation. America then fought the Ottomans in World War I, whose defeat trumpeted the abolition of the Caliphate by Ataturk in 1923.

The abolition of slavery and the abolition of the Caliphate were equivalent acts, stripping Allah of Sovereignty. The modern Jihads we are seeing are a rejection of both acts. America is the Great Satan to the Islamic Supremacists of the world precisely because it fought piracy and abolished slavery and ushered in an age of disorder to the communities of Islam.

It is no coincidence that Hassan al Banna began the Muslim Brotherhood in 1923.

-Gary H. Johnson, Jr. (September 21, 2009; 4:00pmEST)
_________________________
 Leave a COMMENT.

powered by [ stevencopley.com ]