An Open Letter (part two)

An Open Letter to The Mythical Moderate Muslim
(part two)
Dear Sir or Madam,
A few short days ago, we sent you a letter which closed with a question. It was rather detailed because we hoped you would see there was honest effort, research, and logical reasoning, behind it. It appears, my dear elusive, and vocally shy Muslim, you have thus far elected not to reply. Could it be our message has failed to reach you? Or might there be other reasons.
Never the less, being the eternal optimists we are, we’ve decided perhaps our first question was a tad too bold. So, in an effort to allow you a chance to take a smaller step forward in an effort to find your “true inner moderate” ™ , we offer question two.
Question Two preface:
Although the PR department for Islam is always pushing “Peace“ as the true meaning of the word “Islam”. We have come to find out there is a more correct translation (1) for same.
“Islam”, in reality, translates to “submission”. And conversion “by the sword”(2)(3)(4) appears to be Islam’s modus operandi based on writings in the Qur ’an and other sources.
Where your particular brand of faith, in it’s attempts to gain the hearts and minds of various people, is currently fermenting unrest in Afghanistan, Sudan(5), and Indonesia(6), just to name a few of the worlds “hot spots.
And where one might argue the Muslim short term goal in Iraq is out and out civil war. The long range goal having one Islamic faction or another given control over the government (and thus, by sharia law, all the peoples) of Iraq.
Finally, in Iran, the country many consider the heart and soul of Islam’s modern day expansionist thought, Muslims hope to (re)establish a world wide Ciaphate.(7)(8) And seek to become wielders of a nuclear scimitar(9)(10).
The above points being said, our question to you-oh Moderate Muslim is this:
Question Two
How can it (Islam) have any sort of legitimate claim to the title “The Religion of Peace” ?
Waiting in the fervent hope you will chose to rise up and be heard from soon.
We remain,

The Civilized World
(references below the fold)

(1) It might seem strange to think of this as a misconception, but in fact it is. The root word of Islam is “al-silm” which means “submission” or “surrender.” It is understood to mean “submission to Allah.” In spite of whatever noble intention has caused many a Muslim to claim that Islam is derived primarily from peace, this is not true. Allah says in the Qur’an (translated):
[2:136] Say (O Muslims): We believe in Allah and that which is revealed to us and that which was revealed to Abraham, and Ishmael, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the tribes, and that which Moses and Jesus received, and that which the prophets received from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and to Him we have surrendered. [Arabic “Muslimoon”]
A secondary root of Islam may be “Al-Salaam” (peace), however the text of the Qur’an makes it clear that Allah has clearly intended the focus of this way of life to be submission to Him. This entails submission to Him at all times, in times of peace, war, ease, or difficulty.
USC-MSA Compendium of Muslim Texts, Ten Misconceptions of Islam, Misconception 1,
(2) What history bears record to during this first century of Islamic expansion is a consistent pattern of pillage, destruction, enslavement and mass murder from Lebanon, to North Africa, to Greece, Italy, and Spain. Bat Ye’or in her groundbreaking study of this subject writes, “This general picture of destruction, ruin, massacre, and deportation of urban and rural captive populations was common to all the conquered territories in Asia, Africa, and Europe.”[1] These facts are well documented by historians of all types contemporaneous with the Moslem expansion.
[1]”The Decline of Eastern Christianity under Islam”, p. 52
A Survey and Critique of Islam according to the Church Fathers, Fr. Josiah Trenham,
(3) What it has signified in the past and signifies at present for masses of Muslims is well summarized in a statement by the world renowned Ibn Khaldun (A.D. 1332-1406), Islam’s great historian, sociologist and philosopher: In the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the (Muslim) mission and (the obligation to) convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force. Therefore, caliphate and royal authority are united in (Islam), so that the person in charge can devote the available strength to both of them at the same.[24] {24} “Ibn Khaldun, The Muqaddimah”, trans. by Franz Rosenthal (New York: Pantheon Books Inc., 1958) Vol. 1:473. According to Ibn Khaldun Islam’s universality and “obligation to gain power over other nations” distinguishes Islam’s jihad from the holy war of other religions. As to the importance of jihad he states: “Although the personal exercise of the office of judge was to have been the task of (the caliphs), they entrusted others with it because they were too busy with general politics and too occupied with the holy war, conquests, defense of the border regions, and protection of the center. These were things which could not be undertaken by anyone else because of their great importance…” (Vol. 1:454). For further observations on jihad, including his assertion that revenge is man’s motive for war, see Vol.2:70-73.
“Jihad in Islam: Is Islam Peaceful or Militant? and An Initial Christian Response”, Ernest Hahn, Summary-para 2
(4) The majority of the Qur’an’s texts themselves clearly identify jihad as physical warfare in Islam and, Islamically, God’s way of establishing the Kingdom of God on earth. They hardly require to be interpreted metaphorically. Likewise, from the Hadith and the earliest biographies of Muhammad it is just as evident that the early Muslim community understood these Quranic texts to be taken literally. Historically, therefore, from the time of Muhammad onwards, jihad as physical warfare in support of the message of Islam has been a reality for the Muslim community. Hence it comes as no surprise when even terrorists easily appeal to these source materials to justify their actions, not to speak of their teachers who teach the theory and the art of terrorism.
“Jihad in Islam: Is Islam Peaceful or Militant? and An Initial Christian Response”, Ernest Hahn, Summary-para 5
(5) Darfur Liberation Front, Sudan Liberation Movement (SLM), Sudan Liberation Army (SLA), Justice and Equality Movement (JEM), ,
(6) LA Times, “Separation of Mosque, State Wanes in Indonesia”, Richard C. Paddock, Times Staff Writer, March 20, 2006 ,,1,3118414.story?coll=la-headlines-frontpage&ctrack=1&cset=true
(7) Oh Mustazafeen (deprived, oppressed) of the world! Oh Muslims and Muslim Countries of the world! Arise and wrest your rights by your teeth and fingernails! Never mind the rigmarole and propaganda cries of the superpowers and their puppets! Drive out from your lands your wicked rulers who hand over your wages to your enemies and the enemies of Islam. Yourselves and the dedicated public servants should take charge of the affairs of your country. Gather together, all of you, under the proud banner of Islam and fight the enemies of Islam and of the deprived peoples of the world. Advance toward an Islamic sovereign government with so many free and independent republics. If you realise this, the arrogant powers shall retreat to their rightful positions and all the Mustazafeen will come to inherit the earth and attain to guardianship over it. Look forward to the day when God’s promise shall be fulfilled!
Ruhullah Al-Musavi Al-Khomeini, Last Will , page 21,
(8) Yet, under the current Islamist regime and its extremist president, Iran perceives Israel as the “small Satan” to America’s “great Satan”; it perceives Israel as a Western warhead whose defeat will mark the first step toward overtaking Western civilization and establishing a new global caliphate(emphasis mine-GuyS.). Since Khomeini’s revolution, Iran’s anti-Israel posture has become part of its raison d’être, as well as a cornerstone of Iranian foreign policy, which acts in the name of the transnational, so-called “nation of Islam.”
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Special Events, “Confronting Iran”, Moshe Yaalon, March 7, 2006,
(9) In August 2005, the IAEA announced that most of the highly enriched uranium (HEU) particle contamination found at various locations in Iran were found to be of foreign origin. The IAEA concluded much of the HEU found on centrifuge parts were from imported Pakistani equipment, rather than from any enrichment activities conducted by Iran.
In late August, Iran began announcing it would be resuming nuclear activities in Natanz and that Tehran would be willing to negotiate as long as there were no conditions. In August, Iran refused to comply with a resolution from the IAEA to halt its nuclear program, stating that making nuclear fuel was its right as a member of the NPT. The European Union believed that although Iran did have a right to nuclear energy under Article 4 of the NPT, it had lost that right because it violated Article 2 of the NPT – “not to seek or receive any assistance in the manufacture of nuclear related weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.” On 24 September 2005, the IAEA found Iran in non-compliance of the NPT. The resolution passed with 21 votes of approval, 12 abstentions, and one opposing vote. Russia and China were among those that abstained from voting and Venezuela was the only country to vote against the resolution. The resolution stated Iran’s non-compliance due to “many failures and breaches” over nuclear safeguards of the NPT were grounds for referral to the UN Security Council.
NTI, Iran Profile, paras 5-6,
(10) In concurrence with growing diplomatic tension over Iran’s nuclear program, on Thursday it emerged that intelligence services in the West are convinced that Iran is taking covert means to develop nuclear weapons, in addition to the nuclear program under the partial supervision of the IAEA. Russian intelligence is believed to agree with this assessment.
Haaretz, “Western sources: Iran has covert nuclear channel”, Ze’ev Schiff, March 10, 2006,



Filed under WOT

2 responses to “An Open Letter (part two)

  1. The Open Letter, Part II

    As M told you earlier, Guy over at Snugg Harbor started an open letter to the “Moderate Muslims”. It was intended to be a one time deal, but Guy, in his ever present mindset as a retired Senior Noncommissioned Officer,…

  2. J

    It’s grown painfully obvious by the silence of the Moderate Muslim© that they have NO claim to such a title. But then again, what religion does. It reminds me of a line from the movie Dogma…”What’s really pissed God off is all the bad things that have been done in His name”. OK, I had to paraphrase, my memory isn’t that good. What I do remember is that in my time in school (that would be BR, Before Revisionism) that history taught that more conflicts and out and out wars were (and are) fought over religion and one’s belief that theirs is the only one than any other issue.
    Slightly off topic, and maybe another question for you to ask that Mythical Moderate Muslim is this. If Mohammed (pbuh)led his jihad from the front and directed that Allah demanded such, why are the current leaders hiding in the hills of Pakistan and Afghanistan? Should they not be “wielding the sword of jihad” in FRONT of the troops as Mohammed did? I don’t agree with the tenants of Islam (or most major religions, for that matter), but at least he LED troops, he didn’t send them to commit suicide with the vague promise of virgin service in heaven…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s