Sunday, April 4, 2010

Playing games with words.

Aesop’s Fables were a collection of fables written by a Greek slave named Aesop who lived in ancient Greece between 620 and 560 BC. His fables are some of the most well known in the world. The fables remain a popular choice for moral education of children today. From his name the term Aesopian Language has come to mean the use of a hidden meaning to an obvious word or definition. Back in the 1960’s at the height of the cold war era, I recall someone in The John Birch Society, a pro-American, anti-communist group, had pointed out that when the communists say they wanted peace what they really meant was that peace to a communist was the absence of resistance to communism.

Today the world is shaken by acts of terrorism at the hands of radical Muslim extremists. This so-called religion of peace wages Jihad against every non-Muslim nation for apparently no other reason that they are non-Muslim. According to Wikipedia, Jihad is an Islamic term and is a religious duty of Muslims. In Arabic, the word jihād is a noun meaning "struggle." Jihad appears frequently in the Qur'an and common usage as the idiomatic expression "striving in the way of Allah (al-jihad fi sabil Allah)".  A person engaged in jihad is called a mujahid, the plural is mujahideen.  According to Islam, all jihad is defensive and anything or anyone not Muslim is an insult, a humiliation, an affront to Islam.

Obama's Muslim adviser, Dalia Mogahed, said, "Many have claimed that terrorists have 'hijacked Islam'. I disagree. I think Islam is safe and thriving in the lives of Muslims around the world. What the terrorists have been allowed to take over are Muslim grievances."

Now, according to National Review’s web site, National Review Online, Andy McCarthy writes an article titled, Amnesty International Comes Out of the Closet — Endorses "Defensive" Jihad.
Former Gitmo detainee Moazzam Begg is a committed jihadist and unabashed supporter of the Taliban. In the fashion of CAIR — a creation of the Muslim Brotherhood formed to support its causes, such as Hamas, in the camouflage of a "civil rights" organization — Begg shrewdly realized he could win fawning admirers and allies on the Left by posing as a human rights activist. So he formed a group in Britain, Cageprisoners, which claims to be a civil rights organization whle promoting the Islamist agenda — and aligning with such other anti-American jihadist terrorists as would-be Christmas bomber Umar Abdulmutallab and Anwar al-Awlaki (an imam to some of the 9/11 hijackers and an inspiration to both Abdulmutallab and Fort Hood mass-murderer Nidal Hasan).
As Tom details, the disconnect between terror- and sharia-promotion, on the one hand, and civil rights, on the other, has weighed heavily on some authentic civil rights activists. After complaining for a couple of years to no avail about Amnesty International's support for Begg, Gita Sahgal (head of AI's "gender unit") finally went public, pointing out that “to be appearing on platforms with Britain’s most famous supporter of the Taliban, whom we treat as a human rights defender, is a gross error of judgment.”  For her trouble, Sahgal was reprimanded by AI and ultimately suspended. AI's treatment of Sahgal prompted a "Global Petition" by some international human rights supporters, protesting AI's action (in conjunction with all the usual grousing about the evils of the United States).

In response to the petition, AI Secretary-General Claudio Cordone has issued a letter in vigorous defense of AI's collaboration with Begg and Cageprisoners. Steve Emerson's Investigative Project on Terrorism has the story, here. In the letter, Cordone states AI's position outright: advocacy of "jihad in self defence" is not antithetical to human rights. That Islamists reserve unto themselves the right to determine when Islam is, as they put it, "under siege," and when, therefore, forcible jihad is justified, is plainly of no concern — only actions America's self-defense are worthy of condemnation.

This has long been obvious when it comes to such Leftist bastions as AI and Human Rights Watch. AI has now made the obvious explicit.
So now we have the modern day equivalent to an Aesopian definition of Jihad, which to every non-Muslim means Islamic terrorism. To the west Jihad means a Holy War but Amnesty International says jihad is only self defense. The radical Muslim terrorists are fighting and killing all those whom they oppose because they are defending Islam. What are the radical Muslim terrorists defending? They must believe the old saying, If you are not with us then you must be against us. So peace to a Muslim means converting to Islam, or else. It says so in the Qur'an.

No comments:

Post a Comment

No foreign language comments allowed. English only. If you cannot access the comments window send me an email at