All Human Lives are NOT Sacred

By: Cherson

The world has known Muslims in various forms for centuries. We know them as ruthless warriors-and outstanding scientists. As writers and poets, and as wild savages killing Christian nuns because some newspaper published something they did not like about their “prophet”.

But the phenomenon of the Islamic terrorism is the problem the West has not faced in its relationships with Muslims before.

But Islam is now the same as it has been since its beginning in the 7th century. Didn’t Muhammad call to kill the Infidels? The countless number of times, read the Quran.

Didn’t Muhammad declare that the ultimate goal of Islam is to dominate the world and that the means Muslims must use to achieve this goal is Jihad? Again, for the countless number of times.

Narrated Anas bin Malik:

Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.’ And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah.”

What’s not clear?

But since the 13th century, when the Mongols captured and hung The Old Man of The Mountain, nobody heard about “Islamic terrorists/assassins” .Until they re-appeared in the 20th century.

Strange situation.

Islam is the same. Its doctrine, its goals and means to achieve them have not changed. But for 700 years Muslims were quiet. Yes, of course, they were quite a savage lot and fought each other all these centuries. But, they only fought each other. Over there in Islamic countries.

But THERE WAS NOT A SINGLE TERRORIST ATTACK AGAINST THE WESTERNERS IN THE WESTERN COUNTRIES.

But in the second half of the 20th century, all of a sudden…

If Islam has not changed and Muslims have not changed, but for 700 years there were no terrorist attacks until the second half of the 20th century when they suddenly started, then SOMETHING HAS CHANGED! What was it?

Our attitude to the problem and our moral values.

We must look back, when there was no Islamic terrorism – and try to understand, WHY there was no Islamic terrorism THEN. It will immediately give us the answer to the favorite question of our liberal media: Why is there the Islamic terrorism NOW?

When did Muslims start the terrorist attacks, or when did the modern terrorism begin?

The answer can be given with the precision up to a minute: 4:30 A.M., Munich, September 5, 1972, the Olympic Games in Munich. The attack by the Palestinian Arabs of Black September terrorist group against the Israeli athletes. Here is when it started.

And what happened in the West at the end of the 60s?

Those who are in their 40s-50s will give the answer immediately: “New Era”. Sexual Revolution,” Hippies”, LCD, integration, Martin Luther King and his “dream”, political correctness, the fashion for the “left” movements and ideology, Che, Mao, “Make Love, Not War”, the Vietnam veterans throwing their combat medals on the lawn before the White House and the youth who burnt their draft messages in public are applauded and admired. The students-the most educated and advanced social group-openly condoned drugs and free sex. The linguistic taboos were destroyed-we are not bourgeois hypocrites!-and the West started to use the dirtiest words in public, from the TV screens, in the newspapers and in the student campus. Homosexuality stopped being a shameful sexual aberration and all of a sudden became almost the sign of belonging to the more advanced social strata.

And of course, the Human Life and the Human Rights…Human life, all of a sudden, became sacred, even if this is the life of a serial murderer and rapist.

And the rights of an Individual were declared to have the priority over the rights of the Society; the rights of a finger or a coccyx suddenly became more important than the rights of an organism as a whole.

OUR MORAL VALUES CHANGED-and that was when the terrorism had begun.

AND WHY DIDN´T IT BEGIN EARLIER???

Very simple: Until our moral values remained rational, i.e. until, for example, we were guided by the simple doctrine that the life of one our soldier is more precious than the lives of a 100 enemies, being them soldiers or civilians, the Islamic terrorists had no chances fighting the West and had nothing to offer to the multimillion Muslim masses in exchange for their support.

The Muslims simply had no future in fighting. France just a couple of years ago stopped to shoot “the Algerian insurgents” like rabbits. Great Britain only recently got out of India, leaving it to Mahatma Gandhi. Some 50 years before that any English soldier would simply crash Mahatma’s skull with a gun’s butt and that would mean the end of “the decolonisation of India”. And Germany as well as the whole Europe was getting out of the ruins of the WWII. The life was pretty hard, the morals were pretty strict, and the social guarantees were pretty modest. And practically all the men in Europe and America were recent soldiers who would calmly and without any remorse simply lynch any terrorist between the first and second cup of coffee and would not even remember him two hours later: “the serious enemy”, by God! A cockroach from the waste -bin!

ANY ATTACK ON EUROPEANS AND AMERICANS FROM ANY ISLAMIC COUNTRY UNTIL THE END OF 60S WOULD LEAD TO THE IMMEDIATE AND DEVASTATING RETALIATION STRIKE, NO MATTER THE NUMBER OF CASUALTIES AMONG MILITARY PERSONNEL OR CIVILIANS OF THIS ISLAMIC COUNTRY.

But even in those times immigrants from Islamic countries were moving into Europe. Not in the quantities close to the number of a locust flight, like today, but – in quite enough numbers to serve as a recruit base for Jihad recruiters and to perpetrate the attack on “Godless West” from within.

But, to our surprise, we shall not find even a trace of such attacks of Muslim immigrants on Europeans and Americans in those years.

The explanation is evident: the attitude of the Western society to the immigration problem was also very different then. Those who were lucky to get to Europe or USA knew and understood that this civilisation had been built by the Christian white people and they were only guests in it. They knew that they were the second-class people in Europe, but this situation seemed fair and just to them. To be the second-class, third-class or twenty third-class in Europe or USA was better than to slowly die of hunger in Iran, Syria or Egypt.

So-what to fight for? For converting Europe and USA into something similar to what we ran from: cruel, poor, dirty and dangerous? No, thank you.

They did not pretend for the social position of equality with those who had created the society they were living in.

And it would not occur to anyone to declare that some Arab or Turk who came to London without any document the day before yesterday is equal in rights to the Englishman with twenty generations of ancestors living in this London for centuries. The immigrants also knew that the power and law were on the side of those who had created this civilization and that any conflict with the Whites in the land of the Whites meant fast and sure deportation back home, where they would be all equal –in their right to die of hunger – and such an approach seemed to them quite fair and evidently well-reasoned

THE WORLD IN THEIR OPINION WAS JUST.

Well, and in the late 60s the neo-liberals “informed” them that all the peoples, nations, countries, cultures and religions were equal. That we are all equal and have the equal rights for all .And finally, the neo-liberals started to root in the minds of Europeans and Americans the complex of guilt of Europeans and Americans before Arabs, Africans and all the peoples of the world, and started to explain to them that these other peoples have the right- and are welcomed – to pass to the Europeans and Americans the bill for “the centuries of “exploitation”, ” unjustness”, and so on.

And very soon the immigrants, until then loyal citizens who were happy with their social position, understood that the rich, educated and prosperous whites were in debt before them.

“I want what these white Christian dogs robbed me of back. Right now!”

THE WORLD STOPPED BEING JUST FOR THEM.

The terrorist ideologists got the idea of what to offer to the people: these damned Whites had robbed us. Let’s get back what was robbed!!!

And this simple and unsophisticated but very attractive idea of “Robbing the Robber” was supported by the traditional Islamic “until all the world is for Allah”.

Terrorists offered to the people the attractive idea and made it look noble by connecting it to Islam.

And the neo-liberals in student campus, in the media, at the international political forums “explained” to Europeans and Americans that these demands were right and just.

The eternal aggressiveness of Islam stopped to meet the resistance.

And Muslims started to attack Europeans and Americans.

Well, my dear brothers and sisters,” white Christian dogs”, Muslims slap you? But the weaklings SHOULD BE SLAPPED, so that they would know their place!

The REAL root of modern Islamic terrorism is our weakness which is the consequence of our new moral and ideological values.

Look at Israel. How much time would Israeli Army need to get over with Hamas?

I think not more than a week. But only if Israelis stop to appreciate the life of an Arab “civilian”, who readily and happily supports the idea of killing the Jews, MORE than they appreciate the life of an Israeli soldier.

In Jenin, in 2005, 5 Israeli paratroopers, the boys between 18 and 23 years old, were led to ambush by an Arab woman. They got under the crossfire-and were killed. The Israelis captured this woman. By the martial law, she was a bandit and the Israelis had all the right to shoot or hang her right on the spot. Did they shoot her? No. They brought her to the CIVILIAN trial. She got 3 or 4 years of jail. Now she is already free.

And Israelis present this stupidity as the proof of the “high moral values of Israeli Army”.

Cruel measures are sometimes the kindest

The cruelty of the stronger increases suffering in the short run but decreases it over the long term by stopping wars sooner and, what is very important, by CRUSHING THE ENEMY¨S WILL TO FIGHT. Low intensity perpetuates conflicts. Tolerating enemies is provocative.

If Israel attacked Hamas with all the might of the IDF that would mean the death of some 500-1000 people on both sides in a week, and another 4000-6000 would be wounded. And what do we have now, applying our “high moral values” and keeping the conflict “at low profile”? 4000 dead in just only 5 last years (1000 Israelis and 3000 Arabs), and 40000 wounded (some 6000 Israelis and 34000 Arabs).

Americans used that approach with Japan, killing in Hiroshima and Nagasaki about 200,000 people, but making Japan immediately surrender which saved the lives of more than a million Japanese and Americans.

It’s known since the times of Machiavelli: prolonged suffering is more painful than any reasonable speedy solution.

Statehood, war and conquest are ugly, but if there is a national resolve to embark on that path, it should be done efficiently, without inflicting prolonged sufferings on one’s own or on the subdued.

We are brainwashed by the liberal dogmas and these dogmas do not let us solve the very simple problem with very simple means.

The life of a human being IS NOT SACRED.

A man who raped and strangled 6-years-old girl must be executed.

A group of 7 young Muslim scoundrels of Great Britain who drugged with heroine the 12-years-old girls and then gang raped them for 2 days must be executed.

A Muslim man who killed his Christian neighbor and set his house on fire, with all his family, 3 kids and a pregnant woman, died in flames, such a man must be executed.

The Hamas “fighters” who in cold blood shoots in the head 3 Jewish girls of three, four and 6 years old in front of their bleeding pregnant mother and then kill the mother, too. They must be executed without any mercy.

And of course, those who planned and perpetrated 9/11 in New York, the Atocha attack in Madrid, the attack with combat gas in Paris metro, the London terrorist attacks, those who murdered over 200 innocent tourists in Bali – must be executed.

During all the history of Mankind, the rapists and murderers were executed. And nothing happened, you know! Our society has not stopped to exist and this has not stopped its progress. I shall even dare say that these measures helped our society to move forward faster.

And, I am sorry to say this, but the rights of an Individual are one step LOWER than the rights of Society. A Society is an organism. An Individual is A PART of this organism. Imagine a finger all of a sudden declaring: my life is more important than the life of the organism as a whole! And the organism responds: yes, sweetie, whatever you say, only feel fine and comfortable.

Sounds stupid? But this is what the modern neo-liberal ideology invites us to accept as The Highest Law.

THANK LIBERAL IDEOLOGY FOR THE ISLAMIC TERRORISM WHICH KILLS YOU TODAY.

And now let’s think: if the real root of Islamic terrorism is our own neo-liberal ideology and its apologists, then WHAT MUST WE DO FIRST IF WE REALLY WANT TO FIGHT AND WIN ISLAMIC TERRORISM?

The answer to the question how to put an end to Islamic terrorism is very simple:

CRUSH THE WILL OF THE ENEMY TO FIGHT, DRIVE THEM AWAY, IF NECESSARY – AND LIVE PEACEFULLY.

And if you want to be tolerant, multicultural and liberal, if you insist that “the Life of Any Man is Sacred” and that “the Human Rights is the highest priority of any Society”- then be ready that you will be attacked again.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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

%d bloggers like this: