| 
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
   | 
Islam & Defunding the UN  
Tuesday, November 27, 2007 
  Reposted 
From March 31, 2007
 The reason we face the problem of radical Islam today is that, in its entire 
history, Islam has seen no Renaissance, no Reformation, no Period of 
Enlightenment. These titanic events in Western history led to the development of 
secular values that came out of, but were separate from, the Judeo-Christian 
religion that birthed them. And these events gradually took religion from the 
sphere of a government imposition and moved it into the realm of the individual 
and local community.
 
 The Renaissance, the Reformation, and the Enlightenment were each developed 
through the process of critical thought - the questioning and challenging of 
religious ideals and dogma. It was this critical thought that allowed the West 
to seperate the wheat -- the belief in God and universal concepts of moral 
behavior -- from the chaff of religion – dogma that restricted development in 
all aspects of society: political, artistic, scientific, philosophical. Thus, 
today do our universities turn out the finest scientists, the finest writers, 
the finest mathematicians and astronomers, while the universities in Saudi 
Arabia primarily turn out Wahhabi clerics. And it is why the West leads the 
world in science and the arts while the morals police in Saudi Arabia hunt down
sorcerers and the Saudi courts apply 
Wahhabi Sharia law to order the
flogging of victims of gang rape.
 
 There are seeds from which a Muslim Enlightenment could yet occur. They would 
require criticism and debate to take root. Yet these seeds are under mortal 
threat today from the growth of Wahhabi / Salafi Islam.
 
 The seeds which would allow for an Enlightenment lie in Islam's earliest 
history. Year 1 to Muslims begins with Hijra, Mohammed’s emigration to Medina in 
622 A.D. When Mohammed died, Islam was still largely confined to Arabia. It is 
important to note that, before Mohammed died, he left his followers with a 
concept most clearly stated in a hadith - an authenticated saying of Mohammed. 
That hadith provides that the ummah – the community of Muslims – can “never 
agree on an error.” Complimenting this in the Koran, it says “People, you order 
what is right, forbid what is wrong, and you believe in God.” (3:110)
 
 These concepts, taken together, allow for the evolution of Islam. And in another 
critical development following Mohammed’s death, as Islam progressed, there came 
the concept of ijtihad (see
here and
here). Ijtihad is the practice of reasoning 
from the texts, the hadiths, the sunna and the works of scholars to determine 
what Islam should mean, what it should approve and disapprove. If there will 
ever be a moderation of Islam, it will come from those concepts of the hadith 
and the Koran mentioned above, and from the practice of ijtihad.
 
 The remainder of Islam's history tells us why these seeds of an Enlightenment 
never took root. Following Mohammed’s death, Islam spread at a pace never before 
or since duplicated. Its rapid expansion – by the sword – continued almost 
unchecked for the next several hundred years. Actually, in this regard, for any 
Muslim to criticize the West as imperialistic is irony of the highest order. The 
West are pikers compared to the Islamic caliphates. Within 130 years following 
the Hijra, Arabic Muslims had conquered the Middle East, Turkey, all of North 
Africa, and the better part of Spain, and they were fighting battles inside 
France.
 
 Through about 1100 A.D., Islamic society, led by the Arabs, far outshone the 
West in learning and technology. It was a far more enlightened society than what 
was to be found in Europe at the time. Indeed, at the turn of the first 
millenium, the premier city in the world was not London, Paris or Rome, but 
Baghdad. But, along with this vast expansion powered by the belief in Islamic 
destiny came the desire to control the precise nature of Islam by the Caliphs. 
At the end of the tenth century, the “gates of ijtihad” were ordered closed by 
the Caliphs and the Muslim philosophers cooperated. The concept of free 
reasoning fell from grace in Islam. This closing of the gates of ijtihad is 
credited by many scholars as the cause of the stagnation of Islam in succeeding 
centuries.
 
 But there was much worse on the horizon. In the late 12th century came invasion 
by the Turks, followed closely by Ghengis Khan and the Mongol horde in the 
thirteenth century. For the Arabs, this was a catastrophe of titanic 
proportions. They were overrun, and it was the Turks, practitioners of Sufi 
Islam, not the Arabs, who emerged as the leadership of Islam. And into this time 
of turmoil was born Ibn Taymiya, the man whose philosophy and writings would be 
the foundation for Saudi Arabia’s Wahhabi Islam.
 
 Taymiya started from the proposition that Islam was from God, and it was God’s 
intent that Islam should spread to the four corners of the earth. In this light, 
Taymiya saw the success of the Turk and Mongol conquers as a punishment from God 
because Arab Muslims had allowed Islam to be corrupted. His answer was to return 
to what he believed animated Islam at the time of Mohammed. He was puritanical 
and a literalist. The Islam he envisioned was one of absolute tenets – dogmatic 
and beyond questioning.
 
 Fast forward to eighteenth century Arabia, where Ibn Wahhab was born.
Wahhab embraced the teachings of Taymiya 
and built upon them, arguing that any deviation therefrom was heretical and that 
the offender should be put to death. Wahhab promoted a triumphalist and 
imperialistic religion that saw anyone not in its membership as an enemy to be 
converted, conquered or killed. There has been little if any deviation from 
Wahhab's original dogma through to the modern day. Indeed, for example, one 
aspect of Wahhabi doctrine, taught in Saudi schools at least as recently as 
2003, is that it is permissible to enslave “polytheists.” That comes from a 
Saudi textbook. If you are a Christian, by the way, you are a polytheist. 
Wahhabism is the soul of radical Islam. To go against any tenet of Wahhabi Islam 
is to conduct impermissible innovation and thus, to be labeled takfir, an 
unbeliever, – and subject to losing your head.
 
 To continue with the chronology, Wahhab found his way to Najd, a backwater of 
Arabia controlled by tribe of the Sauds. Wahhab partnered with the Sauds and 
what followed, over the next two centuries, was an incredibly savage conquest of 
the Arabian peninsula by the House of Saud. And in each place they conquered, 
they imposed Wahhabi Islam.
 
 Fast forward now to the 20th century. Two events of note occur. Turkey, home of 
Sufi Islam and the caliphate presiding over the majority of the Islamic world, 
came into World War I on the side of Germany and was ultimately defeated. Its 
Middle Eastern empire was divided up among the European counties. Attaturk took 
power in Turkey and divested Islam from politics, secularizing the country. This 
was, in essence, the first step towards a revolution in the Islamic world – the 
divorcing of religion from the nation state and limiting it to the private lives 
of Turkish citizens. Unfortunately, as time has gone on, Wahhabism has infected 
Turkey, and today we see the creep of Islamism into the state apparatus. Turkey 
has withdrawn from the precipice of a revolution to moderate and modernize Islam 
that its combination of secular government and classical Sufi Islam may have 
led.
 
 The second event of note was the triumph of Wahhabi Islam with the conquest of 
Arabia by the House of Saud. Indeed, even before the final conquest, Wahhabi 
Islam had already influenced – or infected, if you like – many of the other 
schools of Islam. Two prime examples are the Pakistani Deobandi school that 
today is the basis for the Taliban, as well Islam in Egypt, from whence arose 
the first truly modern radical Islamist organization, the Muslim Brotherhood.
 
 But Wahhabi Islam only truly became an engine of conquest with the growth of the 
oil industry and the influx of billions of petrodollars into Saudi Arabia. 
Today, Saudi Arabia is
spending these billions to spread its brand 
of Islam to the four corners of the world and to supplant the other schools of 
Islam. Other than oil, Saudi Arabia’s main exports are Wahhabi clerics, Wahhabi 
mosques, and Wahhabi schools to every corner of the world. Further, the 
petrodollars are used to fund the Middle East studies program at most major 
colleges in the Western World – whose teaching invariably cover, cover for, and 
cover up Wahhabi Islam – and to fund Wahhabi organizations such as CAIR that 
perform much the same function in Western society at large.
 
 I do not know that Wahhabi Islam also influenced and radicalized Ayatollah 
Khoemeni. But, given that he took Iranian Shia Islam out of its historically 
nonpolitical role in Iran and thrust Shiaism, for the first time in history, 
into the political realm with the creation of Iran’s theocracy, I would suspect 
that it did. I would be absolutely amazed if some scholar did not eventually 
catalogue such an influence.
 
 To sum up, the whole of the Islamic world is endangered by the growth of Wahhabi 
Islam. And Wahhabi Islam holds it dogma to be beyond question – upon pain of 
censure or even death. If there is to be a moderation and modernization of Islam 
– a Reformation and Period of Enlightenment if you will – it will not will arise 
out of Wahhabi Islam without tremendous bloodshed.
 
 Ultimately, in the world of ideas, it is only through questioning and critical 
reasoning that advancements occur. To put an Islamic face on that, it is only 
through the embrace of ijtihad and the concepts of Islam discussed earlier that 
there is any chance that Islam will finally see a great historical change to 
moderate and modernize from Wahhab’s vision of 7th century Islam into a form of 
Islam that can coexist with the rest of the world in the 21st century. And 
Western society has an obligation not to be coerced into silence, but to openly 
criticize what we find dangerous and wrong in Islam. If our voice is cowed, how 
can we expect the voice of would be moderates in the world of Islam to stand up 
- and withstand the inevitable Wahhabi onslaught to their existence. The cost to 
humanity and the world if Islam does not have its Reformation and Enlightenment 
will almost assuredly be apocalyptic.
 
 Which brings us to today, and the United Nations Human Rights Organization. I 
have already posted that I believe the UN exists in an alternate Islamic 
universe. It finds fault with illegal acts or human rights violations only in 
Israel. See
here and
here. But we have now reached the final 
Islamic straw.
 
 Friday, March 30, 2007, Islamic countries pushed through a resolution at the UN 
Human Rights Council demanding a global prohibition on the public defamation of 
religion. Lest there be any doubt about which religion they are concerned with, 
the only religion mentioned in the resolution is Islam. As stated in the minutes 
from the
UN Human Rights Council meeting:
 The 
Council expresses deep concern at attempts to identify Islam with terrorism, 
violence and human rights violations; notes with deep concern the 
intensification of the campaign of defamation of religions, and the ethnic and 
religious profiling of Muslim minorities, in the aftermath of the tragic events 
of 11 September 2001; urges States to take resolute action to prohibit the 
dissemination including through political institutions and organizations of 
racist and xenophobic ideas and material aimed at any religion or its followers 
that constitute incitement to racial and religious hatred, hostility or 
violence; also urges States to provide adequate protection against acts of 
hatred, discrimination, intimidation and coercion resulting from defamation of 
religions, to take all possible measures to promote tolerance and respect for 
all religions and their value systems and to complement legal systems with 
intellectual and moral strategies to combat religious hatred and intolerance; . 
. . The UN is 
only doing the work of radical Wahhabi Islamists at this point. If there is ever 
to be a peaceful coexistence with Muslims, the West cannot gag itself as CAIR 
and the Islamists at UN would have us do. We can coexist with Muslims as long as 
they are not trying to kill us and impose their religion by coercion or by 
working fundamental changes to our Western secular values with ridiculous 
charges of Islamaphobia. Unfortunately, that is not the reality. Thus, it is 
their religion that needs to change. It needs to go through its Reformation, and 
there needs to be a period of Enlightenment. The clearest way to stop this 
transformation from ever occurring is to outlaw criticism of Islam. This would 
be putting a nail into the coffin of Western civilization, in addition to 
insuring the ultimate domination of the Wahhabi philosophy in Islam.
 If this is what we can expect from UN as reformed, it needs to be defunded by 
the U.S. In the Senate hearings for his confirmation as the new U.S. Ambassador 
to the UN, Zalmay Khalilzad has argued against defunding the UN but has also 
stated that the UN faces a “mortal 
threat" if it fails to reform. There are no reforms on the horizon. 
It is time to allow the UN to subsist on Rials until it does.
 
  
http://wolfhowling.blogspot.com/2007/11/reason-we-face-problem-of-radical-islam.html |