Saturday, May 4, 2013

Defeating Islam: The Theo-Political Tyranny of our Democratic Age; Refuting Islam as a Religion

 

Defeating Islam: The Theo-Political Tyranny of our Democratic Age

Prof. Paul Eidelberg

Defeating Political Islam: The New Cold War (2009) is the title of a book written by American nuclear physicist, Dr. Moorthy S. Muthuswamy, who was born in India. 

The book has been applauded by experts such as Steven Emerson, Executive Director of Investigative Project on Terrorism, Robert Spencer, Andrew G. Bostom, Bill Warner, Director of the Center for the Study of Political Islam, as well as by Geert Wilders, Member of the Dutch Parliament.  

It took great courage to write this book because, unlike legions of Islamic scholars from the renowned Bernard Lewis to the dauntless Daniel Pipes, Dr. Muthuswamy is calling for a refutation of Islam as a religion.

This objective, which may strike "politically correct" scholars as "Islamophobia" and cultural relativists as philosophically impossible, is the sine qua non of overcoming Islamic imperialism and defending Judeo-Christian civilization from its most dangerous enemy. This book combines scholarship and practical wisdom—a wisdom sadly lacking among the political and intellectual leaders of the democratic world, especially in Israel and America. 

In Muthuswamy's book we learn why peace-making with the Arab Muslims now occupying Jewish land is politically impossible. The impossibility is inherent in the very nature of Islam which Muthuswamy deliberately and euphemistically calls "political Islam." He begins on the surface by pointing out that Arab-Islamic organizations like Fatah and Hamas
 
"have no vision of [economic and social] development—due to the focus on medieval sharia and jihad as the instruments of [their] internal and external policy framework …  Iran is another example of a country in which Islamists gained power through the ballot box and then pursued jihad-spreading policies…. Due to their control of the military and the mosques, the two strong institutions that would be capable of challenging them, the radicals can maintain control over the reins of power" (pp. 40-41).

 This applies to the Arab Muslims occupying Gaza as well as to those inhabiting Judea and Samaria, the so-called West Bank.  Of course, these "radical" Muslims constitute the norm of Islamic culture, and the exceptions to the norm are not strategically significant. Without denying the existence of Muslim "moderates," they simply cannot compete intellectually with Muslim "extremists," who have mastered the Islamic scriptures, which they readily quote to impress and win over the ignorant Muslims masses, whose local grievances and ingrained anti-Semitism are manipulated and redirected against Israel and the United States.

It follows from Dr. Muthuswamy's analysis that the Arab Muslims living in the so-called West Bank—really Judea and Samaria—are not fit for independent statehood. Hence, only a lack of courage and wisdom can explain the Netanyahu government's succumbing to U.S. pressure by endorsing the "two state solution" to the Israel-Palestinian conflict.

Even a leftist like former MK Yossi Sarid admitted that the Arabs in question do not merit statehood. Sarid had extensive experience on the Knesset Committee on Defense and Foreign Affairs. When Iraq, under Saddam Hussein, invaded Kuwait, Sarid was taken aback when Arabs in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, supported the rape of Kuwait. He was all the more disillusioned when Israel's own Arab citizens applauded the Iraqi dictator. 

These Muslims, contrary to Netanyahu's economic or crypto-Marxist peace proposal of making Arabs middle class consumers—these Muslims, I say, are not primarily concerned about building the economic infrastructure of a Palestinian state. No, they have trained their children to become jihadists, as Dr. Muthuswamy indicates. The murderous agenda of these Arab Muslims has the support of an overwhelming majority of the Palestinians. Muthuswamy estimates that more than 50% of Islam's 1.5 billion adherents support jihad. If 20% is a more reasonable figure, that's only one jihadist for every American!

Finally, there is absolutely no evidence to indicate that the Palestinians will metamorphose into bourgeois democrats and live in genuine and abiding peace with Israel. 

We may go even further.  No less than Middle East expert Daniel Pipes regards the Israel-Egypt peace treaty of March 1979 a failure. In his November 21, 2006 article in the New York Sun, Pipes pointed out that 92% percent of the respondents in a poll of one thousand Egyptians over 18 years of age called Israel an enemy state. 

So what can Prime Minister Netanyahu expect from Egypt's political creation the PLO, now called the "Palestinian Authority"?  He should seek the advice of Dr. Muthuswamy.

 And so should American pundits and politicians who, out of fear of the canard of racism or religious bigotry, turn a blind eye toward Islamic theology and its worldwide Jihadic and genocidal objectives, manifested again and again since the time of Muhammad. Unfortunately, and unlike Churchill, liberal democrats find it difficult to equate Jihad with Mein Kampf. ◙

No comments:

Post a Comment