August 29, 2014

Patsourakos: Islamophobia will end in the US when terrorism ends

Over at his Theology and Society blog, George Patsourakos, an occasional commentator on the AOI blog writes on the effort by the Council for American Islamic Relations (CAIR – apologists for jihad actually) to combat “Islamophobia,” a term they borrowed and adapted from the homosexual rights movement that is used to silence the criticism of detractors. Patsourakos writes, sure, we’re afraid, but not of Muslims as much as we are of Muslim terrorism. Stop the terror and “Islamophobia” will disappear overnight. (One consolation: The spell checker still does not recognize the word. “Homophobia,” however, passes muster. This shows how when you say something nonsensical long and loud enough, people think it really means something.) Essay follows.

This past week, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) decided to establish a branch to deal with Islamophobia (the fear of Islam and Muslims).

There is no denying that many Americans have had a negative attitude toward Islam and Muslims since September 11, 2001, when about two dozen Muslim men were responsible for crashing four airplanes, which resulted in the deaths of over 1,000 innocent people.

The barbarous acts of 9/11 also resulted in the loss of respect for Muslims and the Islamic religion by a plethora of Americans. Precautions were implemented very soon after 9/11 to prevent similar senseless tragedies from reoccurring.

For example, the U.S. government required all large airplanes to have a solid locked door leading to the plane’s cockpit to prevent passengers from entering the pilot’s area. Moreover, plainclothes armed U.S. marshals were added to many airline flights as an additional precaution.

Screening passengers very closely before they can enter a flight and scrutinizing and limiting luggage by airline security officials are precautions that have continued to the present time.

These are just a few of the precautions that the U.S. government has implemented in order to prevent another 9/11-type of tragedy — a tragedy that was planned and carried out by Muslim terrorists.

The fact is that Americans are correct in fearing terrorism by Muslims, or Islamophobia, as this phenomenon has come to be called. Indeed, it would be foolish for Americans to feel otherwise, not only because of 9/11, but also because of the savage terrorist activities that Muslims still practice throughout the world today.

Terrorism by Muslims, then, has not had a significant impact on the United States since September 11, 2001, because of the extensive precautions that the U.S. has put into place since that time. Terrorism is still prevalent today in nations that do not have the ingenuity or the intelligence resources to prevent it.

Consequently, Islamophobia in the United States will end only after there will have been no Muslim terrorist activities throughout the world for several years. For Americans to believe that Islamophobia in the U.S. will end any sooner, is a complacent denial that can only lead to additional terrorist-driven disasters.

Comments

  1. Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
    George Michalopulos says:

    George, you’re 100% correct. I categorically reject using the suffix “-phobia” in any instance. It is yet another example of the Left tarnishing traditionalists and those who hold to time-tested verities. Hence, I am against normalizing the homosexualist lifestyle, not for stoning homosexuals. As for Islam, it is what it is. We in the West however have NOTHING to apologize for and we should do everything in our power to forbid the importation of this religio-political entity in our midst.

  2. Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
    Greg says:

    Islamophobia in the United States will end only after there will have been no Muslim terrorist activities throughout the world for several years.

    Sometimes I run across something that is well stated, crystal clear, short and to the point, and irrefutable in the correctness of what it says. This is one of those times. As I read along I thought about how quickly hatred and fear of the Japanese and the Germans dissipated after WWII.

    Thank you, Fr. Jacobse, for giving this a little more air time.

  3. Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
    alexis banias says:

    YES! The article is poignantly terse and calling a spade a spade. “Knowledge is Power,” as the saying goes, and there are plenty of books out there presenting islam in a clear, cogent, and objective manner. Yet our society of subjective “tolerance,” or cowardice, as I like to call it, continues to grovel in the shadow of mecca. Actions do speak louder than words. My compliments to Greg in his aforementioned comments, which remind me of something Ann Coulter said. “We should Christianize all muslims so that they won’t fly planes into buildings.”

  4. Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
    Michael Bauman says:

    I would add that just because one is opposed to the ideals, beliefs and practices of a person or a group of persons it does not mean that one hates or fears said person or group.

  5. Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
    alexis banias says:

    Michael:

    I notice that the whole demonizing of the opposition to the current liberal drivel spewed by the likes of the pelosi’s, bidens, et al. is a very infantile way of debating the issues. Their methods are tantamount to a child covering his ears and yelling at the top of his voice so the ideas of the opposition cannot be heard. What’s scary is that this ilk is leading the country.

  6. Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
    Michael Bauman says:

    Did you see that Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar walked off the set of their own show when Bill O’Reilly said that Muslim’s killed us on 9/11? They forced him to say it was ‘extremists’ didn’t even want to hear that Muslim’s did it–as if somehow the bombers were not Muslim. I wonder Goldberg and Behar are so careful in parsing their words when it comes to things Christians do? I doubt it. Of course O’Reilly caved because he simply is as ignorant of Islam as are Goldberg and Behar.

    The question of Sharia Law, jihad, the ummah, etc. and the place the actually hold in modern Islamic thought needs to be seriously debated. Then we might be able to say authoritatively whether the 9/11 folks and the terrorists are extreme or not.

    Until then unless a Moslem rejects Sharia Law as in an way normative or desirable in the United States one should not trust him. Along with a specific rejection of Sharia Law in the U.S in both English and Arabic along with an equal rejection of violent jihad, the subjugation of the infidel, etc, etc. Without those rejections, Islam has no place in the civil life of the US. Any Muslim running for public office who does not make a clear, direct statement on the supremacy of the U.S. Constitution over Sharia Law in both English and Arabic, should be disqualified from standing for election. Of course the question then becomes can a Muslim do that and still be a Muslim?

    It amazes me that women who are so vocal about ‘women’s rights’ don’t hit on Islam all day every day. There is simply no place for women as any sort of equal in any Islamic society anywhere now or in history.

    If Goldberg and Behar had treated a Muslim man with the disrespect they showed O’Reilly, their guest BTW. They’d be dead. Of course, they would have been beaten or jailed long before now if they were in a Muslim country and dared to speak their minds.

    • Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
      Harry Coin says:

      I admit to Michael’s puzzlement about this apparent extreme support by these politically active women given Islam’s repressive ideas about women. What’s up with that anyway? Whoopi and Joy seen only through a gap in the cloth for the eyes? I don’t think so.

      • Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
        Iskandra says:

        These women are living in denial. They have to live there in order not be seen as traitors to the progressive march toward an unattainable utopia.

        Many people live in denial of the truth because they would have to give up many of their long cherished beliefs and would no longer be a part of the “intellectual elite.” To be pro-choice one must lie to one’s self that a baby is not being killed when it is aborted. To be pro-gay marriage one must lie to one’s self that two men or two women can have a marriage in the same sense of the word as a man and a woman. To accept and celebrate a religious political system (Islam), one must lie to oneself that it is a religion of peace when overwhelming recent and historical evidence is contrary to that position.

        If they denied it was a religion of peace then they would be bigots and haters. So they choose to live in a lie in order to belong to the elite, “enlightened,” pseudo-intellectual cause.

        • Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
          Fr. Johannes Jacobse says:

          Iskandra, your note reminds of one of my favorite essays, Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s Live Not by Lies.

        • Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
          Harry Coin says:

          But we see uber-liberal politically correct ‘leading women’ who escaped repression going back and doing journalism and reporting on the whole horrifically repressive thing and getting it aired.

          Maybe it’s part in parcel of the theme Fr. Hans mentioned earlier — this denial that a thing has essential qualities. Making it sort of ‘fart joke’ level discussion to discuss what a thing says for itself. The only acceptable discourse is ‘what that is about in context’. So in that world the constitution is a living breathing document — it means what we say it means because we do the living and the breathing but without the obligation to probe what the constitution’s actual provisions are, or if doing so only en passant to please those who need old style word content anchors.

          So they don’t probe what Islam says for itself, instead they notice people from Islamic places can be of excellent character and so think observations about the content of the religion is ‘really about’ some essential racial / ethnic / national origin bigotry. But the ‘words mean things’ old school types can’t just leave it alone.

          I’m just guessing. All clear as mud to me really.

          • Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
            George Michalopulos says:

            Michael, I agree totally. There is a cognitive dissonance when it comes to Progressives and Islam. I believe it is because of many factors, the chief one being hatred of Christianity and the West in general. Also from decades of conditioning that European civilization is evil but the cultures of “people of color” are inherently good. Even when honest people point out the evil that they do, well that’s ok, because their customs are “quaint.” That’s why it’s ok for Mexican-Americans to belong to an organization called “The Race” (La Raza) which was founded by Jorge Vansconcelos, an early fan of Hitler, but Southerners should not feel pride in striking the Stars and Bars of the Confederacy. Completely hypocritical.

            As for Behar and Goldberg, I will gladly hold the coats of Jihadis when they force them into burqas. It would be condign punishment.

  7. Back to Recent Comments list  Back to top
    alexis banias says:

    I like what Michael and George have to say. I had seen the silly little women of “The View” walk off, the hens clucking away and pecking at O’Reilly; however, the man was absolutely correct about 911. It wasn’t the Norwegians, Hindus, or Buddhists that hit us. Their so-called “liberal-mindedness” was truly shown for what it was – ignorance and cowardice. I am sure coffee-drinking soccer moms across the country are staging a coup d’etat. LOL:-)

Care to comment?

*