Friday, September 21, 2012

Killers

Memory is a funny thing. At least, mine is. I can seldom explain why it's tossed some particular bit from the sub-basements of my life at me for a fresh perusal.

Today it's an old episode of Star Trek: "A Taste Of Armageddon." First season, I believe. The episode was about two worlds that had been at war for many generations, and had "civilized" the war by ceasing to use real weapons. Instead, the attacker would use some sort of detectable simulation of an attack; computers on both worlds would assess the effectiveness of the "attack;" and some number of citizens of the defender would be hustled into disintegration chambers -- real ones. Thus, "war" was made neat and non-destructive. At the conclusion of an "attack," all the buildings on both sides were still standing, and all the real estate unmarred. Only people were lost: men and women selected by the tactical computers to be the casualties of the "attack."

The intrepid Captain Kirk puts an end to this madness, of course; never mind his means. Councilman Anan, the leading figure of Eminar, the world the Enterprise has visited, pleads with him to let them continue, arguing that the arrangement is surely better than the horror and destruction of a real war. "We're killers," he says, implying that Mankind's destiny is to take lives, making an antiseptic arrangement like the one he and his enemies have established the best anyone could hope for. "Yes, we're killers," Kirk replies. "We're human beings with the blood of a million savage years on our hands, but we can stop it. We can admit that we're killers, but we're not going to kill, today. That's all it takes. Knowing that we won't kill, today."

Yes, we're killers. For a race of killers, the path of maturation can only be this: to learn, by painful trial and devastating error, when it's time to kill, and when to stay our hands...and when it's time to kill, on whom we should train our sights.

***

Few incidents have illustrated the irredeemable nature of the Islamic world half as well as the recent attacks on American embassies in Cairo and Benghazi. The Obama Administration's nonsense about it having nothing to do with America or American policies has no bearing on the essential savagery displayed. Only savages react to one man's words with violence against others. Only savages drag the dead bodies of murdered innocents through the streets, capering and crowing about their "triumph." Only savages are "governed," if the word applies, by men who implicitly excuse such behavior by calling for the punishment of the uninvolved.

Nor were these events unprecedented. Recall that the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, whose regime had displaced that of Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, endorsed the seizure of our embassy and our personnel, and injected his "government" into the "negotiations" for their release. (That release finally occurred on the day Ronald Reagan was inaugurated president. I wonder why?)

Wherever they've possessed the means and the opportunity, Muslims have behaved as savages against whatever "infidels" were ready to hand. Indeed, there's no place on Earth that "boasts" a non-trivial concentration of Muslims where non-Muslims can feel entirely safe. That includes the various Muslim concentration points in this country and the other nations of the West.

If you think this is merely a coincidence, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.

The pseudo-religion of Islam literally exhorts Muslims to this sort of behavior. There are dozens of verses in the Qur'an, the Sunnah, and the ahadith that teach Muslims to distrust the "infidel," to wield deceit and dissimulation against him, and to make use of "the sword" in advancing Islam wherever and whenever it's practical. The only serious differences Muslim authorities have over these doctrines are about when the conditions are right for their implementation. Consider these statements of the matter:

"Islam says: Whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword and in the shadow of the sword! People cannot be made obedient except with the sword! The sword is the key to Paradise, which can be opened only for Holy Warriors! These are hundreds of other psalms and Hadiths urging Muslims to value war and to fight. Does all that mean that Islam is a religion that prevents men from waging war? I spit upon those foolish souls who make such a claim." -- Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini
"The minarets are our bayonets; the domes are our helmets. Mosques are our barracks, the believers are soldiers. This holy army guards my religion. Almighty Our journey is our destiny, the end is martyrdom." -- Recep Tayyip Erdogan
Qur'an, Sura 9:73: "O Prophet! Struggle against the unbelievers and hypocrites and be harsh with them."
Qur'an, Sura 9:5: "But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem..."
Qur'an, Sura 9:29: "Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, of the people of the Book, until they pay the jizya with willing submission and feel themselves subdued."

Savage dictates well tuned to the impulses and inclinations of a savage people.

***

Our political "leadership" has gone from foolishness to treason:

The Obama administration is weighing the release of blind Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman — the spiritual adviser to the 1993 World Trade Center bombers — in a stunning goodwill gesture toward Egypt that has touched off a political firestorm, officials said yesterday.

The Egyptian government “asked for his release,” an administration source told The Post — and Rep. Peter King (R-LI) confirmed the request is being considered.

The White House, State Department and Justice Department each issued statements denying any deal is in the works, but, “There’s no way to believe anything they say,” said Andrew McCarthy, the former assistant US attorney who prosecuted Abdel-Rahman. “I believe there may already be a nod-and-wink agreement in place.”

This is another step in the direction, not of peace, but of all-out war. Obama and his lieutenants will not command the federal government or American foreign policy forever. The release of Abdel-Rahman would both inflame domestic opinion and invigorate the jihadist movement in the Middle East. The tempo and savagery of Islamic violence would intensify, and American targets would be among the most prominent. More and more Americans would reflect on what it's in our power to do, and would ask one another why we haven't done it.

"You cannot do wrong without suffering wrong," wrote Ralph Waldo Emerson. Wrongdoing evokes demands for justice. Justice denied evokes cries for vengeance. The miracle of the moment is that those cries haven't become deafening already.

***

This morning, the esteemed Mark Alger declaims thus:

ONE OF THE MOST WITLESS questions asked of we who urge a quick ripping off of the bandage, a short, sharp shock, a decisive, sudden, and — one might say — final solution to the problem of What do We Do About Islam is, “Do you want to kill a billion Muslims?”

Well, no. But the point should be made in response that it probably won’t take that many.

Possibly it wouldn't. Probably? I hesitate to use the word, especially given the ferocity Islam has demonstrated since September 11, 2001. Of only one thing am I certain: If all the Muslims on Earth were simultaneously put to death, Islamic violence against "the infidel" would come to a halt.

This is not a nice direction in which to send one's thoughts. But recent events have more and more people thinking along these lines.

Civilized people. Americans.

The world has allowed itself to forget just how bloody-handed we can be. Indeed, so much attention has gone to pissant little hellholes like Iran and North Korea that the recognition of our own arsenal of mass destruction has almost disappeared. Yes, that celebrated Muslim apologist Barack Hussein Obama has argued for its elimination, but for the moment he's being held at bay. The American nuclear arsenal could eliminate every major Islamic population center on Earth in a single day. Were the president to give the order, four-fifths of the world's Muslims would vanish in bursts of nuclear fire.

We're killers. We, the human race. Featherless bipeds. Trousered apes. Mankind.

It's extremely bad policy to get the most powerful 300 million of us, who've repeatedly demonstrated our skills at the bloodiest pastime, thinking that we should kill today -- that it might be time to kill en masse.

Food for thought.

7 comments:

furball said...

It will take you or Mark or maybe one of the "wimmin" who used to post regularly on Eternity Road to explain it for me - the slower, sedentary American of the "post-modern age."

But how is it that Americans who listened to Thomas Paine's "Common Sense" and followed George Washington and were rough-and-tumble, became such wusses?

I include myself in that. We all wail at the liberal take-over of schools and rail against the "media" and point to how marxists have done this and that.

Chances are, if Jefferson had had the means, and muslims had harmed his United States as they have us, he'd have nuked them and made a very good and oft-quoted speech about it.

Why aren't we like that? Are we so caught up in black versus white that we can't see "the enemy at the gate?" Are we so fat and dumb and happy with TV that we don't recognize a culture that is centuries-old and directed to over-power us?

Why can't I even MENTION to my wife that Obama is a plutocratic narcissist who will use anti-republican methods to impose anti-American rules on our republic?

If the Muslims are smart, they'll cool it and let America politically-incorrect itself into denial, stasis, guilt, shame and moral relativism.

"Who are we to judge?" "We've done worse." "Our hands aren't clean." "The Bible has stuff about killing infidels and things just like the Koran."

Which all sort of leads to: "We deserve what we get." Which means we've lost the moral imperative to ask of ourselves, "What is right?"

The past is past. People screw up and even the best church or religion or historic hero makes mistakes. But right and wrong still exists and we - each and every one of us in EVERY time - can still tell the difference.

How often do you let the kid down the street steal your lunch money and beat you up before you decide he is wrong? How often do you let nations pervert the UN before you decide that THAT way doesn't work?

How often do you let Islam foster hatred, violence, terrorism and death before you decide to kick the sh** out of it and be done with the pestilent garbage?

Or do you just keep making excuses, hope, sing and work with the UN?

I was born in 1950. I've spent the better part of my life looking into whether or not we should have bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki. . . and what was gained by fire-bombing Dresden and other German cities.

I felt guilty and soul-bad about that. But my conclusion is that America is not a unicorn. Hundreds of thousands might have died in an invasion of Japan. Dresden? I'm so sure of. But defeating Nazi Germany? NO DOUBT.

Winning the WAR against Japan? As quickly as possible? NO DOUBT.

Crushing Islam? Tell me your doubts and how many innocent deaths you are prepared to countenance. Tell me how low you are prepared to let civilization go before it rises to strike down a cult that is absolutely committed to its destruction.

There will be blood. I'd rather a billion muslims die in fire and conflagration than 10,000 Jews and Americans in terrorist attacks.

Yes, I said that. A BILLION. If there are innocent or "nice" muslims, let them go somewhere safe and denounce the killing, rapist, tyrannical despots that are dictating their cesspool of a religion. I realize the "religion" is such a killing cult that even muslims can't ask for "redress."

They are apostates too. Fair game.

All Islam wants to do is kill others and plunder their stuff.

That's no surprise when you read the history of Mohammed.

If a BILLION people believe in that asshole and want to carry out his mission, then you really only have two choices.

You know what they are.

Anonymous said...

Francis. Furball? Are you advocating nuclear weapons?

Are you advocating killing perhaps millions of peaceful Muslims?

Would you have advocated killing millions of Christians in the 30 year's war?

After all, both Catholics and Protestants burned "witches." Both armies raped and killed innocents.

And the Bible gave them license via scriptual text, just as the Koran does.

Anonymous said...

1400 years after Christianity got started, the church started killing people and ruining civilization.

It's now 1400 years after the start of Islam.

Are you so much better?

Francis W. Porretto said...

Hello, "Anonymous." I see you don't have the balls to put your name to your opinions. You'll notice that I always do so, so that I have to stand behind what I've said and admit when I've been wrong. Inasmuch as I have trouble conducting a conversation with someone who won't give his name, but thinks he has the right to slander me and my Church at my expense, I think I'll just call you Asshole.

If you weren't functionally illiterate, Asshole, you might have noticed that I'm talking about a set of rising inclinations among ordinary Americans and the power this nation has to wreak destruction, not a prescription I advocate. You might have done a little more reading yet. In particular, you might have encountered this essay, where I propose the approach I would prefer, and the rationale for it. But I suppose one can't expect too much of the, ah, rationally challenged. Actual effort might wear you out, or worse, upset your preconceptions.

Now, Asshole, concerning your attempt to create a moral equivalence between Christianity and Islam: Christ never advocated the use of violence for the furtherance of His Gospel. Indeed, He condemned the use of force for religious purposes, which you might have already learned but elected to forget. Therefore, anyone who does use force in His Name is committing the foulest of all sins, and garnishing it with a side of blasphemy. By contrast, Islam does advocate deceit, fraud, dissimulation, and violence in the advancement of its domain, when and where they're practical. It seeks the domination of the entire world, such that every human being alive is a Muslim, a dhimmi subjugate, or a slave. If you had read the Qur'an, you'd already know that, but you haven't, have you?

I hope that clears up your little problem. (If not, try penicillin.) If you should return here to comment further, I'll simply delete your droolings from the moderation queue. Now go outside and play with the other morons. My allotted time and energy for dealing with your sort have been exhausted.

KG said...

I had a beautiful German Shepherd like that, once....a big,friendly and intelligent offsider who would play with others happily and harmlessly.
But the wolf in him never, ever slept.

A lovely response to anonclown, Francis.

Anonymous said...

On the off-chance that Anonymous is not simply an Internet troll, I recommend that (s)he read the Richard Fernandez essay on his "Three Conjectures."

pdwalker said...

In spite of the pussification of the white male, and the world wars that sapped much of their strength, the blood of killer warriors still runs through their veins. Combined with their gift of useful, native intelligence, their war making fury will be as a force of nature.

All it needs is the right push,the right spark.

The day is coming.