Sunday, December 9, 2007

The Golden Key

Published by Wake Up America - December 7, 2007
"Jihad is Islam's "highest peak", it's reason for existing."
-- Benjamin C. Powell, Jr.

Reposted by request March 13, 2008.

Moderate Muslims. We search for this mysterious and illusive species as fervently and hopefully as we search for life on other planets. We have set up high-tech listening posts all around the world in the hope of retrieving a single signal from them. Any small message at all, even the most fragmentary sign that would prove their existence. There is, we have been told, good reason to believe that they're out there, but unfortunately so far we've been unable to substantiate this belief.

However, these disheartening results have in no way diminished our enthusiasm for this worthy project, or caused us to lose confidence in the probability of its eventual success. We just keep listening and hoping.

These Moderate Muslims, we have been advised, are the Golden Key to winning this War on Terror -- or more precisely, this Islamic War against the West. It is to them we must turn to solve these intractable problems. Because, our experts have assured us, the problems inherent in Islam can only be resolved from within Islam, by those ephemeral and semi-mythical MMs. Only they have the moral authority to redefine the tenets of Islam and set it on its new course. But unfortunately so far we have been unable to substantiate this belief.

However, these disheartening results have in no way diminished our enthusiasm for this worthy project, or caused us to lose confidence in the probability of its eventual success. We just keep on listening and hoping.

Meanwhile, our brave American warriors are at this very moment confronting this ruthless Islamic menace all over the world, most particularly in Afghanistan and Iraq. And, through their professionalism and their courage and their daily sacrifices, they have achieved some remarkable successes.

But here on the home front we are still in turmoil. Here, we are in the real quagmire, still bogged down in that never-ending, and seemingly-hopeless battle of legalistic semantics. We are still stuck in those preliminary stages of attempting to define the enemy. While our heroic soldiers are fighting and dying on the battlefield, we at home are still in the process of trying to precisely determine who it is we are fighting.

We are NOT, we have been repeatedly admonished by our highest authorities, at war with Islam. Islam is a religion of peace. We are certainly not at war with all of those good peaceful Muslims all over the world. And we are most definitely not at war with those Moderate Muslims. They, in fact, are our stalwart allies in this war, which is really just a war against extremism, against just another form of religious fanaticism, kind of like a Middle Eastern version of the KKK.

We have gone to great lengths to get this message out there to the world, we want the world to understand: We are NOT at war with Islam. We take great care to make clear-cut distinctions between those good Muslims and those bad Muslims. And we want those good Muslims around the world and in our midst to clearly understand our position. You have nothing to fear from us, we promise you. We honor your religion and your right to practice it.

In short, if you're a Moderate Muslim you have nothing to fear from us.

But, now, what about those Moderate Infidels?

Surely there must be some Moderate Infidels out there. I wonder, are those eminent religious leaders, those wise and all-powerful imams and mullahs busily engaged in that laborious process of making those important distinctions between those Moderate Infidels and those Fanatical Infidels, whom they are fighting daily on their battlefields? Are they carefully separating out all those good Infidels from those bad Infidels? Are they perhaps bogged down in some moral quagmire of their own?

When they attacked us on 9/11, did they make certain that those killed in the attacks would only be those bad Infidels?

To expect to be saved by these mysterious Moderate Muslims, by their somehow rejecting the fundamental tenets of Islam, rejecting those perfect divine pronouncements of the Prophet, is as foolhardy and hopeless as expecting a Christian to reform Christianity by denying the teachings of Christ, or expecting a Jew to reform Judaism by denying the Torah.

It just ain't gonna happen.

I'm sorry folks, but the time for gentlemanly debate has long passed, it's time to wake up, before it's too late. Our enemy has clearly and repeatedly defined this battle for us, even though our political leaders have yet to find the courage to do so. For our enemy the issues are clear-cut and straight-forward: it is simply a battle of Islam against the Infidels.

We must finally accept them at their word and fight the fight that's there, not the fight we'd rather fight. WE are our only salvation. No one else. Not the British. Not the Australians. Not the Europeans. Not even those brave Israelis.

And certainly not those semi-legendary Moderate Muslims.

Comments cross posted from Wake Up America:
I have done a few posts every time Moderates stand up and speak out but it doesn't happen often enough.

If for no other reason than to protect the integrity of their religion for those that live it peacefully, they need to speak out loudly and consistently.
Spree Homepage 12.07.07 - 9:55 pm #

Muslims may be moderate, but Islam is not. Islam is malevolent, malicious, mercenary & militant.

Ask yer moderate Muslim if he accepts or rejects Al- Taubah 29. Fight those who... until... . Its a yes/no question with no middle ground. Either Allah commanded his slaves to attack Jews & Christians until we are subjugated and extorted or he did not. There is no relief valve; no bypass.

A person who embraces Islam yet hates offensive warfare suffers from irreconcilable cognitive dissonance.

Open Reliance of the Traveler to Book O, Chapter 9, Paragraph 8 and read. What does the Caliph do, to whom and why. Al-Shafi'i & al-Ghazali have answered how often: at least once each year.

Allah's word is final and perfect; it can not change nor be edited. Since Moe exemplified it,it can not be reinterpreted.

Islam must be eliminated. Lets get started.
Ben Homepage 12.08.07 - 1:03 am #
The 'moderate' muslim is the one that will stand by and let the True muslim do the dirty work of the koran for him- just like the Germans stood by in the 30s and let the Nazis do what they wanted, in hopes of getting past all that ugliness and getting to the better life afterwards.

Too bad for them that means hundreds of millions dead. Just ain't gonna be the Kufr dying.
otter 12.08.07 - 5:25 am #
An excellent article Roger. Otter makes an excellent point. Like Spree, I also make a point of posting when Moderate Muslims speak up. Those posts are very few I'm sorry to say.
Debbie Homepage 12.08.07 - 1:56 pm #
Exactly Debbie, I TRULY appreciate every moderate Muslim that speaks up, some knowing the risk to themselves, but the stories are few and far between.

I still say, even if they don't want to get into the political realm of it, they should speak up to defend their religion because many do practice it peacefully.
Spree Homepage 12.08.07 - 2:44 pm #
but spree, if they are "practicing peacefully" than according to the tenets of their religion they are not practicing it at all and are at least as vile as the infidels...
heidianne jackson Homepage 12.08.07 - 3:21 pm #
Heidianne, they can not practice Jihad peacefully.

Jihad is Islam's "highest peak", its reason for existing. By Jihad, Moe was made wealthy and acquired power. That's what its all about.

Jihad may be performed with one's life and property(by the sword), with one's tongue and pen (propaganda & agitation) with the heart( salat) or with one's wealth(financing Jihad). In any case, the outcome is dead or enslaved Kuffar. The means do not justify the ends; neither do the ends justify the means.

Let us live as freemen, with our bodies & property intact, without chains or fetters; without masters. They will not permit it, which leaves us one choice. Induce mass apostasy or mass subduction into Hellfire. Which will it be?
Ben Homepage 12.08.07 - 4:15 pm #
I too agree with Otter. And I agree with that WWII analogy -- even though some people say that they're getting tired of hearing them. Tough. If they work, they work. And, like it or not, we are reliving some of the same mistakes we made back then.

To me, the issue comes down to this: again using the 1930s Germans -- The German people had ample opportunity to denounce Adolf Hitler, but many (indeed, most) chose not to, some for the reasons Otter suggests. Even after he came into power in 1933, there were still those "decent Germans" who were morally or politically opposed to him.

But there soon came a time when their "opposition" became a moot point. After GERMANY started invading its neighbors, the world had to respond, and -- somewhat belatedly -- it did.

But, it must be remembered, the Allies weren't just at war with the Nazis; we were at war with Germany. And, unfortunately, there was no longer any time -- or indeed any will -- to try to separate out those "Moderate Nazis", or those "Good Germans" from the rest.

The Nazis may have started the war, but ultimately it was Germans who had to be fought and beaten -- unconditionally.
The time for subtle distinctions had passed.

I'm afraid we're facing some of these same problems once again. And, sooner rather than later, these Moderate Muslims are going to have to get off the fence and pick one side or the other or they will suffer a similar fate.

Also, it just occured to me, that those people who have most loudly voiced their disdain for the use of WWII analogies, it seems, have invariably been liberals.
Could it be that they just don't like being reminded of the historical precedents for their cowardly form of appeasement?
Roger W. Gardner Homepage 12.08.07 - 8:28 pm #

Cross posted to Faultline USA -- December 9, 2007


  1. Great article Roger.
    I do hope people listen. I'm not going to hold my breath though.
    Congratulations on your new blog.

  2. Getting people to read attentively is difficult. This subject matter is of such vital importance that we can't afford to quit trying.

  3. Most of the Western Muslim establishment is comprised of Islamist groups claiming to be moderates. True moderate Muslims reject Islamic supremacy and Sharia; embrace religious equality and democracy.

    What is a moderate Muslim? According to a dictionary, a moderate is a person who is opposed to radical or extreme views or measures, especially in politics or religion. Yet, majority of the public seem to be struggling with the definition of a moderate Muslim. Perhaps we can make this task easier by defining a radical Muslim and then defining the moderate as an opposite of the radical.

    Muslims Against Sharia compiled a list of issues that differentiate moderate Muslims from Islamic radicals. Hopefully you can help us grow this list. 2008/01/what-is-moderate-muslim.html

    Poll: Who is a moderate Muslim? 2008/01/poll-who-is-moderate-muslim.html

  4. A moderate Muslim is one who has not yet summoned up the courage & resolve required to commit the Kufr Akbar of apostasy.

    A Muslim who has moral scruples against the doctrines and practices of Islam suffers from cognitive dissonance of the first order.

    Allah said: "fight them","cast terror" and make "great slaughter". If you don't want to participate in those sacraments, its time to recognize and act on the fact that Allah is Shaytan renamed.

  5. To Mislims Against Shari'a --
    Thank you for responding.
    I would sincerely love to believe in you and in your cause, but I still have difficulties rationalizing some of the issues involved.
    It still seems to me that if you truly reject some of these absolute core commandments of Islam, of the Qur'an, then it is no longer Islam, but becomes something else.

    I have taken the liberty of reposting some of Benjamin Powell's questions within this comment, as I feel the answers to his questions are pertinent to this issue.

    "So Islam is "a great religion of peace" ? Explain these topic titles from Ibn Kathir's Tafsir. Click them and read their contents. Why did Allah command and order Muslims to commit aggression?
    The Command for Endurance when the Enemy Engaging
    The Command for Jihad against the Disbelievers and the Hypocrites
    The Command to fight Those Who fight Muslims and killing Them wherever They are found
    The Command to strike the Enemies' Necks, tighten Their Bonds, and then free Them either by an Act of Grace or for a Ransom
    The Order to fight People of the Scriptures until They give the Jizyah
    The Order for Jihad against the Disbelievers, the Closest, then the Farthest Areas
    The Order to fight to eradicate Shirk and Kufr
    The Order to fight until there is no more Fitnah
    The Order for Jihad against the Disbelievers and Hypocrites
    So terrorism is haram? Explain these tafsir which explain 8:60 and 8:12!!

    Making Preparations for War to strike Fear in the Hearts of the Enemies of Allah
    Muslims invoke Allah for Help, Allah sends the Angels to help Them"

    Posted By Ben to A NEWT ONE at 1/04/2008 02:53:00 A

  6. Again to Muslims Against Shari'a --

    This is from one of my other articles on this subject --

    If you are truly willing to disassociate yourselves completely from the divinely perfect words of the Prophet, if you are truly willing to turn your backs on the entire force of the argument of his criminal life, if you are truly willing to accept without qualification the natural equality of women, and the right to the existence of a viable Jewish state, then I welcome your rebellion and bow to your courage.

  7. No, Only Moe heard, and what he heard was a bell ringing in his head during epileptic seizures. But Moe "revealed" those commands, which are recorded in the Qur'an and explained in the tafsir topics which Roger quoted from another blog post.

    The Qur'an says that it is perfected and can't be changed. I do not know of any way of overcoming that obstacle.

  8. "It still seems to me that if you truly reject some of these absolute core commandments of Islam, of the Qur'an, then it is no longer Islam, but becomes something else."

    What we reject are not "absolute core commandments", but heresy.

    "Why did Allah command and order Muslims to commit aggression?"

    We believe he did not. Allah is the Most Merciful, the Most Compassionate, and those commands were added by nefarious people to fit their agendas.

    "So terrorism is haram? Explain these tafsir which explain 8:60 and 8:12!!"

    You won't find those verses in our Koran.

    "If you are truly willing to disassociate yourselves completely from the divinely perfect words of the Prophet"

    Calls for violence cannot possibly be divine.

    "existence of a viable Jewish state"

    It may be a closely guarded secret, but there are Muslims who prefer Israel to Muslim countries.

    "Only Moe heard"

    Again, ho d you know? How can you be positive that what he heard was not changed later during multiple re-tellings and re-writings?

    "The Qur'an says that it is perfected and can't be changed."

    And yet it had been. All we are trying to do is to revert it back as close to the original as we can.

  9. Sahih Muslim Book 030, Number 5765:

    'A'isha reported that Harith b. Hisham asked Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him): How does the the wahi (inspiration) come to you? He said: At times it comes to me like the ringing of a bell and that is most severe for me and when it is over I retain that (what I had received in the form of wahi), and at times an Angel in the form of a human being comes to me (and speaks) and I retain whatever he speaks.

    Do you have access to:
    1. a Hafezan with a direct and unbroken isnad leading to Moe
    2. a pre-uthmanic recension of the qur'an
    3. Allah's original sealed tablets ???

    Is there any proof that the 164 violence inducing ayat were added after Moe's death?

  10. Of course not. Just as there is no proof of the opposite.

  11. In Bukhari's Sahih collection, the books of Jihad, Khumus & Expedition provide copious corroborating evidence.
    Volume 4, Book 52, Number 42,
    Volume 4, Book 52, Number 46,
    Volume 4, Book 52, Number 62, which references 33:23. Examine the context, Hilali & Khan make it plain, that the reference is to Jihad. # 62 above cited shows us that the Qur'an & Hadith have a common chain of transmission.

    Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 8, Number 387, Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, Book 92, Number 388, Muslim Book 019, Number 4294, Abu Dawud 14.2635,Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 196 and Bukhari Volume 4, Book 53, Number 386 explicitly confirm the command to fight. Anyone with sufficient curiosity can Google the numbers.

    How do you explain the chapter titles in this Islamic History:
    ??? How many battles did Moe personally participate in?

  12. You are confusing "copious corroborating evidence" with simple hearsay.

    A few years ago there were many articles (including The Times [UK]) discussing president Bush's low IQ. Many of them were based on a study done by the Lowenstein Institute in Scranton, PA. The only problem is that the Lowenstein Institute does not exist.

    The same with the Ahadith. Not only eyewitnesses of the events did not write them, the people who wrote them weren't even Prophet Mohammad's contemporaries. Therefore nothing that we have today comes even close to "copious corroborating evidence".

  13. Sira, Sunnah & most of the Qur'an were transmitted from mouth to ear, and in Moe's day, Islam lacked diacritical marks & vowels. If any part of Islam's canon of scripture and tradition is faulty, the whole package is.

  14. That's where faith comes in. We don't know, we believe.

  15. The majority of believers(Muslim) believe because of tradition/filial piety; hard habits to break.

    Rationalizing the belief set defined by the Qur'an just ain't rational. That process requires total abandonment of rational thought.

    According to 3:7, the whole book is Allah's divine word; whose clear commands are to be believed and carried out. No provision is made for selectivity.