Sunday, June 28, 2015

More Blood, Death, and Horror

Michael L.

{Cross-posted at the Elder of Ziyon and the Jewish Press.}

deathAs I write this on Friday morning, there it is all over the headlines, again.

Islamist Terror Wave Hits Tunisia and Kuwait.

Man Beheaded in France.

What we know as of this moment is that terrorists shot up the resort town of Sousse, some 150 kilometers from Tunis, killing at least 27 people.

Meanwhile, the Times of Israel is reporting:
A suicide bomber attacked a Shiite mosque in the Kuwaiti capital during the main weekly prayers Friday, killing and wounding dozens, officials and witnesses said. The attack was claimed by the Islamic State.
And, needless to say:
At least one person was killed and several were injured in a terror attack on a factory in the Lyon region in southeastern France late Friday morning.

The decapitated body of a man was found on the premises, according to Sky News. It reported that the 30-year-old suspect was known to the foreign intelligence services.

The victim was reportedly an employee of the factory. His head was discovered by police perched on the fence outside the factory, covered in Arabic writing. 
By the time that you read this it will be old news, but I suppose the question that many of us are asking ourselves is just what is it going to take for our media and our academia and our elected officials to start taking political Islam seriously?

There are two things that must be acknowledged.

1)  The rise of political Islam in recent years is the single most significant geo-political happening since the demise of the Soviet Union. 

I do not understand why so many people seem to have a difficult time understanding that political Islam is not just a religion, but a political movement, and like any political movement it is open to criticism and opposition.  The fact is that political Islam, in the form of organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood, the Islamic State, Hamas, Hezbollah, Boko Haram, and all the rest, do not represent Islam as a whole.  What they represent is Islam in its Islamist form.

The form of Jihad.

Too many people seem to think that opposing political Islam is "racist" because it is seen as "Islamophobic" or an attack on regular Muslims.

It isn't.

In fact, cliché as it may sound, no one is abused more under al-Sharia than are Muslims.  What is really bigoted is holding different people to different standards of humanity.  In the Europe and the United States this generally takes the form of "humanitarian racism" and it is the most prevalent form of bigotry found in the West today.

The old-timey, flat-out racism of people like Dylann Roof is, sadly, not dead, but it is certainly dying.

Coming on the heels of Ferguson and Baltimore it is politically-incorrect to say so, but mid-twentieth-century KKK-style, or SkinHeadStyle, American racism is pretty much over - despite this heinous scum in Charleston.

The Klan is not taking over countries.

Neo-Nazis are not destroying ancient artifacts in Palmyra.

On the liberal-left concern with right-wing racists in Europe and the United States is genuine, and politically entrenched, but we should not allow that concern to be used as an excuse to ignore, or downplay, the far more dangerous fact of the rise of political Islam.

2)  The Obama administration sold us out on the issue.

On the question of political Islam the Obama administration simply has nothing to say other than to downplay the seriousness of it and to protect Islam's reputation from itself.

I know that I am not singing to the choir here, and that is a good thing, but it must be stressed that this administration not only refuses to acknowledge the rise of political Islam during the misnamed "Arab Spring" as a serious problem, but has actually aided and abetted that very problem.

The pro-Israel / pro-Obama American-Left must acknowledge that which is directly before their very noses.

Barack Obama is not an Israel-friendly president.  Period.  End of story and stop making excuses.

Barack Obama supported the Muslim Brotherhood and is enabling an Iranian bomb.  All we can do is oppose the administration's foreign policy and hope to put enough pressure on Congress, and the powers that be, to oppose political Islam and prevent that bomb from coming into being.

If you think that the rise of political Islam is a problem now, just wait until you get a gander at what it looks like after an Islamist nuclear umbrella covers the region.

That will be, as they say, game over and a nuclearized Iran will be Barack Obama's foremost legacy.


  1. Unfortunately, America has something far worse to worry about....Confederate flags.

  2. btw, I cannot tell you guys how much crap I have taken for insisting that Obama supported the Muslim Brotherhood.

    Well, this is what we read on page 302 of Michael Oren's "Ally":

    "Most challenging to explain to Israelis was Obama's support for Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood."

    All that's necessary now is for all those Jewish Obama-supporters to simply admit that they supported a president who supported a genocidally anti-Semitic Islamist organization.

  3. I wonder why that is? I don't find the statement controversial. I could even understand someone claiming that there were mitigating circumstances for that support, but don't understand the denial, as we saw from that commenter at Elder's place with the all consonant name, blfwjhtjl, or whatever. He must be from eastern Europe or something, huh? ;0)

    1. Political teamsportmanship and mitigating theories obliviated the obvious.

      On a political level, of course, no good liberal wants to believe that the first African-American president of the United States would support a group that oppresses Gay people, women, Christians, and Jews.

      And because we did not want to believe such a ridiculous thing we simply didn't.

      We shut our eyes and many still have their firmly clenched.

      The mitigating theories are more rational. That is, coming directly on the heels of the joyous and inspiring "Arab Spring" we justified everything in the name, ironically enough, of democracy.

      The Arab-Spring, after all, was considered - at least for awhile - the great up-welling of Arab-Muslim democracy and if the Muslim Brotherhood gets voted into Egypt fair-and-square who are we white, western, racist, imperialists to object?

    2. Or maybe it has more to do that liberals themselves either don't actually care about gays, women, blacks, Christians or Jews or, secretly endorse their persecution. I know our government class does not care or secretly endorses their persecution. What their minions feel is what they're told to feel. Demagoguery is a tool, not an objective. It's a tool through which mass movements are mobilized. Personally I don't believe that Obama is good public speaker, no matter what anyone says, but he's good enough. He's a good enough talisman that his audiences can imagine is saying something he's not. And that's good enough. It's a good enough package - liberal cred, the right pedigree, the right color, the right words.

      Did you ever notice that the less Obama talks and does, the higher his job approval rating gets? Today it's the highest in 6 years - 50%. But he's not said anything of any substance in weeks. Oh he sang a eulogy and watched the Supreme Court do things. But him? Nothing. And that is good enough.

      Liberals might not choose to identify with something or someone who hates blacks, Jews, women, gays or Christians but they're happy enough to identify with those who do at arm's length. As long as the talisman is in sync that's good enough.

      I really wish I could locate my copy of Elias Canetti's "Crowds and Power" - one of the best expressions and analyses of the cultural artifacts of mass movements.