Sunday, December 11, 2011
Robert Spencer, creator and editor of Jihad Watch -- a kind of daily ticker-tape UPI newswire service which relentlessly reports and republishes an ever-mounting mountain of data of various news stories and analysis from various sources from around the world providing massive documentation of the multifariously grotesque and metastasizing pathology of Islam -- has noted:
... a fact that we have pointed out many, many times at Jihad Watch: there is no reliable way to distinguish jihadists from peaceful Muslims.
... what we have pointed out many times over the years: that there is no reliable way to distinguish between Islamic "extremists" and Islamic "moderates".
If these observations are cogent, and if the dangers they imply should alarm us -- and only someone who has not taken the time and trouble to familiarize himself with the mountain of data about Islam would be reluctant to agree -- then what we are faced with, increasingly, as millions of new Muslims continue to immigrate into the West, and as the West continues, insanely, to support and aid various Islamic regimes around the world, is a situation and dilemma which may be expressed by the following vivid metaphor and analogy:
Imagine you have two guns on the table before you.
You know that one is loaded, and the other is not loaded.
But you don't know which is which.
Even though one gun is clearly labelled "loaded" and the other is clearly labelled "unloaded", you also know that the labels cannot be trusted to be accurate.
Now let us say that in order to get something you need -- food, money, or the safety of a loved one -- you are told you must pick up one of the guns, point it at your own head, and pull the trigger. And you must do this several times.
Or, for our metaphorical analogy to better approximate our actual situation we find ourselves in, in the real world, we may say that there are not merely two guns on the table, but two groups of guns, on two tables before you: on the first table is a single gun, or two or three guns, labelled "Tiny Minority of Loaded Guns". On the other table is a whole pile of guns, about 100 of them, all labelled "The Vast Majority of Unloaded Guns". And you are being asked to pick up every last gun from the latter pile, point it at your head, and pull the trigger, not once, but several times each. And yet still, you remain unsure of the accuracy of those labels, for you cannot trust the judgment of the people who affixed them. Better yet, let us say you are being asked to point the gun at the head of your lover, or your spouse, or your brother, or your sister, or your mother, or your daughter, or son, or granddaughter, or grandson, or best friend...
Finally, let us add this detail: Let us say that, unlike the Christopher Walken character in Deerhunter, you are not being forced at gun-point to play this cruel but deadly game -- that, in fact, you have a third choice: to stand up and refuse to play this game by the arbitrary and reckless rules which Politically Correct Multi-Culturalism, in its mainstream dominance, has been trying to impose.
And you can do this, because the West, as bad as certain sectors of it may have gotten, is not a totalitarian society: it remains the freest, most intelligent and most decent collection of societies in the history of mankind (with, of course, plenty of flaws, since nothing is perfect, yadda-yadda...). The West's current fashion of PC MC may remain quite powerful in its influence; but as a fashion, it can go as quickly as it came. And it will. The only question is not whether -- but only how quickly and reasonably it will do so, avoiding the kinds of catastrophic mistakes the West made the last time it dragged its heels waking up to the danger of an evil expansionist culture, the Nazis and Fascism, when, having acted sooner, it could well have spared the lives of millions, and the horrible dislocations caused by a global war.
And so you stand up from the tables and refuse to make this silly choice, because over time, after learning about Islam and Muslims, you have come to the reasonable conclusion to deem all of the guns on the table equally lethal -- and this insane game, as a consequence, irrationally reckless.
Enough is enough. Surely we can do better than to continue, out of misguided good intentions gone grotesquely mad, to convince ourselves to play this suicidal, unconscionably illiterate and ill-informed game of Muslim Roulette.
Ah, but Robert Spencer manages, in his estimable way, to put a deer in the works:
I guess it's not so dire a dilemma after all, eh Bob...?