Monday, December 11, 2023
View Blog
Sep 15

Written by: Diana West
Saturday, September 15, 2012 4:54 AM 

In this address (click "Read More" if you don't see it), the excellent Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MI) makes the crucial, overlooked connections between Islamic sharia speech restrictions -- as systemically promoted by the Islamic bloc countries of the OIC and the Obama administration -- and how the violence across the Middle East this week fits into the OIC-Obama-Clinton strategy to enforce sharia speech restrictions even on Americans, despite our First Amendment rights.   

It's important to realize sharia's prohibition of criticism of Islam is basic Islam: There is nothing "radical" about it. Indeed, it is this basic Islamic censorship that is at the crux of why Islam itself -- not "Islamism," not "radical Islam," not "Islamists," but Islam -- is an existential threat to the survival of any free society. It is why free societies, once penetrated by a Muslim demographic over 1 percent, begin to lose their liberties as a means of "accommodating" -- appeasing --  their new Islamic populations.

The problem is that no one in public life in America, land of the First Amendment, will acknowledge this fundamental, non-radical Islamic threat to this single most important foundation of our  liberty -- free speech. And that includes even La Belle Michele. Early in her speech she gives what might be considered the obligatory sop to PC. While it won't provide her a shred of political cover, it does shatter the arc of understanding the threat, which is why I mention it.

Bachmann, from the C-SPAN transcript :

No one here is suggestion that all Muslims are radical, but we should not be ignorant of the objective reality that there is a very radical wing of Islam that is dedicated to the destruction of America, of Israel, and of Israel's allies.

All Muslims are not radical, she says, which is a logical enough statement, although truly beside the point, which concerns the existential threat posed by Islamic law and ideology to Western liberty. Juxtaposing Bachmann's non-radical Muslims with that "very radical wing of Islam" she also singles out takes us all right back to the "tiny band of extremists" theme, sounded by everyone from George W. Bush after 9/11/01 to Hillary Clinton after 9/11/12.

This is only one point in Bachmann's 19-minute address, but it is a foundational flaw that puts any call to Americans to be vigilant in their defense of liberty onto a cracked footing. Why? Because it implies that within Islam itself -- within its laws, customs and culture -- there is a doctrinal basis for Western-style liberty, too. If it is only the "radical wing" of Islam that is waging this war on the West through a war on freedom of speech, then all we need do is align with the moderate Muslim hordes out there. Indeed, this same non-realist thinking is the rationale for "Muslim outreach," which Bachmann has courageously decried as a vehicle for jihadist penetration of the US Government.

I think the best way to press the point is to focus on Islamic law and ideology. After all, it is ridiculous for any one person to speak for the imagined deviations from Islamic doctrine of  "all Muslims," anyway. To paraphrase Ibn Warraq, Geert Wilders and others, there may be moderates who are Muslim, but Islam itself -- its doctrines, its law, its customs, its goals -- is not moderate.

Islam is radical.


Follow me @diana_west_

Privacy Statement  |  Terms Of Use
Copyright 2012 by Diana West