Pages: 1 2
Of course, such self-censorship has long been taking place among government officials who take every opportunity to whitewash Islam’s tradition of violence and intolerance. Witness the Department of Defense’s report on Fort Hood jihadist Nidal Malik Hassan, which called his murders an instance of “workplace violence,” and despite copious evidence to the contrary, omitted any reference to jihadist ideology as a motivation of Hassan’s attack. But this sort of government self-censorship is nothing new. The doctrine of jihad, which for 14 centuries has meant waging war against the enemies of Islam, has been redefined as a vague “striving in the path of God,” as the National Counterterrorism Center claimed in 2008. Then there’s John Brennan, Obama’s assistant for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, who in 2009 likewise defined jihad as “to purify oneself or to wage a holy struggle for a moral goal.” That would be news to Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini, who said, “Islam says: Kill all the unbelievers just as they would kill you all,” in line with the Koran’s injunctions to “slay the idolaters wherever you find them,” “fight those who do not believe in Allah,” “fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness,” “kill them [unbelievers] wherever you find them,” and to execute Allah’s threat: “I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads.”
Yet Secretary Clinton seemingly is unaware of these facts of traditional Islamic doctrine. Instead, at the conference she indulged the Western pathology of moral equivalence to avoid facing that truth: “Now, I know that in the world today, intolerance is not confined to any part of the world or any group of people. We all continue to deal with different forms of religious intolerance. That’s true here, that’s true in Europe, that’s true among countries in the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, everywhere in the world. It’s true where people, if they are discriminating or intimidating, they’re doing it against Muslims or Jews or Christians or Buddhists or Baha’is or you name it. There has been discrimination of every kind against every religion known to man.”
This statement is factually false. Clinton cannot point to any modern persecution of Muslims, or violence against them and their holy places, that comes close to the incessant violence against Christians on the part of Muslims. In no nominally Christian country are there formal laws against Muslims akin to those in Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, and other Muslim countries that institutionalize discrimination against Christians and Jews. Nor is there anywhere in the Bible injunctions that legitimize intolerance and persecution of Muslims like those in the Koran and other Islamic scripture that stigmatize Christians and Jews and subject them to poll taxes and Jim-Crow like restrictions on their lives. Yet despite these facts, despite the absence of widespread pogroms against Muslims in the West, we have created and worry over the “hate crime” of “Islamophobia,” even while rampant Muslim “Christophobia” is slaughtering Christians to the point of extinction, and threatening Israel with a new holocaust, all with the support and encouragement of government officials and religious authorities.
Such moral equivalence is not just intellectually bankrupt; it is moral idiocy. And it is dangerous, for it blinds us to the true causes of jihadist terror: the theologically sanctioned intolerance, violence, and chauvinism of Islam that has driven Muslim behavior for 14 centuries.
Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.
Pages: 1 2