The ‘Muslims-Killed-by-the-West’ Lie

TalibanThe alleged butcher of the off-duty British soldier, Drummer Lee Rigby, defended his carving up of a living human being by claiming that he was engaging in “an eye for an eye” because the British army is killing Muslims in Afghanistan.

Normally there is no reason to respond to the justifications offered by terrorists and other murderers of the innocent. But in this case it is important to do so because much of the Muslim world resonates to this argument and because much of the world’s left offers this argument.

This is true even though a large majority of Muslims do not support terror and even though leftists do not support it. Nevertheless, throughout the Muslim and leftist worlds it is believed — and our children are taught this at college — that America, the UK. and other countries are targeted by Muslims because we kill Muslims.

The argument is morally perverse and a lie.

First, the U.K. and others are in Afghanistan in order to defend Muslims. Brits and other Westerners are risking their lives, and dying, in that country on behalf of Muslims.

Here’s a question for Muslims and leftists who buy this argument about the West killing Muslims in Afghanistan: Who are we fighting in Afghanistan?

I thought the Brits and Americans were fighting the Taliban, the people who throw acid in Muslim girls’ faces for attending school, the people who murder nurses who inoculate Muslim children against disease. Now, if fighting the Taliban is to be equated with fighting Muslims, this is a real contradiction of everything much of the Islamic world and virtually all of the left have been contending for years — that the Taliban represent a tiny group of extremists in the Muslim world, and that they have so completely perverted Islam that they cannot even be called Muslims.

Well, you can’t have it both ways. If killing the Taliban is the same as “killing Muslims,” then you can’t argue that the Taliban don’t represent Islam or Muslims.

So, on the issue of the West fighting in Afghanistan, the Muslims and the left need to make up their minds: Is killing the Taliban a service or a disservice to Muslims? This is the first and last question both groups need to answer. Everything else is commentary.

Second, if any group here should be entitled to exercise an eye for an eye, wouldn’t it be Christians? It is Christians who are being murdered, and whose communities are being decimated, in the Muslim world. Christians have lived in the Middle East — in places such as Iraq and Egypt — since long before Muhammad was born. It is Christians in Nigeria who are routinely slaughtered by Muslims. And it is Christians in Pakistan who are burned alive in their churches.

And what about the 52 Brits blown up by Muslim terrorists in the U.K. on July 7, 2005? How is it that not one Brit decided to take an eye for an eye against any Muslim?

In the real world — as opposed to the fantasy worlds of the Organization of Islamic States and your local university — it is Christians who are being killed by Muslims, not Muslims who are being killed by Christians.

And there’s a third lie to this claim of Muslims as victims of the West.

Nearly every one of the tens of thousands of Muslims killed in the last few years has been killed by other Muslims — in Syria and Iraq in particular.

There is something of great significance to be learned from this. In the Muslim world today, it is hatred of the West, not love of — or even concern for — fellow Muslims, that animates Muslim atrocities and terror against the West. Just as it is Arab hatred of Israel, rather than Arab love of fellow Arabs that animates the Arab world.

Every Muslim and every Western leftist who perpetrates the lie about the West killing Muslims as the source of Islamist terror abets that terror.

Dennis Prager’s latest book, “Still the Best Hope: Why the World Needs American Values to Triumph,” was published April 24 by HarperCollins. He is a nationally syndicated radio show host and creator of PragerUniversity.Com.

COPYRIGHT 2013 CREATORS.COM

  • potemkin_village_usa

    An eye for an eye is for a specific perpetrator who has caused the blinding of a specific victims eyes to be put out. So…you have the perpetrator’s eye put out in compensation. The drummer did nothing personally to this ignorent butcher who misreads scripture to excuse his political mayhem.

  • http://www.LuckyLuxtonAffiliateMarketing.com/ Keith “Lucky” Luxton

    As usual, let us say that all Muslims are not terrorists. I know several I believe are not. But then they cannot be true Muslims, because the book or bible for Muslims is the Quran. That book has many instructions to Muslims to kill the Pagans or unbelievers. So please stop this PC garbage, that Islam is a religion of peace. Islam is a cult of hate. It cannot even measure up to the standard to be called a true religion

  • http://www.sisteskanse.net/ Asdic

    “This is true even though a large majority of Muslims do not support terror”

    Oh, really? What about the Quran?

    8:12 Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): “I am with
    you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instil terror into the
    hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all
    their finger-tips off them.”

    9:5 But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans
    wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait
    for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish
    regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for
    them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.

    Any muslim who denaunce this, is an apostrate.

  • Wil

    >First,
    the U.K. and others are in Afghanistan in order to defend Muslims.
    Brits and other Westerners are risking their lives, and dying, in that country
    on behalf of Muslims.<

    Did
    Afghanistan ask the Brits and other Westerners to risk their lives, and to die,
    in their country on behalf of Muslims.?

  • Tim Ned

    “Well, you can’t have it both ways. If killing the Taliban is the same as “killing Muslims,” then you can’t argue that the Taliban don’t represent Islam or Muslims.”

    Well put Bernie.

    • Bob Hadley

      You can make that argument very effectively and logically. The Taliban is a relatively tiny group or sect of Muslims, so if you kill 4 Taliban you’ve killed 4 Muslims. But that doesn’t mean that tiny group of Muslims represents Islam or Muslims in general.

      Likewise, if you kill 4 Moonies (followers of Sun Myung Moon), you’re killed 4 Christians. Does that mean that the Moonies represent Christianity or Christians??? Think about it!

      If you’re going to say that the Moonies have corrupted Christianity and thus aren’t Christians, then you might say the same about the Taliban.

      If you don’t like using the Moonies as an example, then plug in some other self-proclaimed Christian group – maybe David Koresh’s group.

      • EddieD_Boston

        When is the last time a Moonie detonated a car bomb outside of a Catholic Church. You reasoning is ridiculous. Typical of he left.

        • Bob Hadley

          Have you lost it mun?

          Have you any sense left at all? You completely missed my point. Why don’t you show the courage to face real issues for once, instead of beating the stuffing out of strawmen? Your views are obviously dictated by your emotions.

          I wasn’t comparing the acts of Christian sects to the acts of the Taliban. My point was that just as members of Christian sects do not represent all Christians or Christianity in general, members of the Taliban do not represent all Muslims or Islam in general.

          The acts of Christian sects versus the acts of the Taliban have zero relevance here. If you can’t understand that, then you must have neurological sclerosis.

          • Tim Ned

            Bob, the point in this article is the inept position made by a murderer of an innocent English soldier that it was in retaliation for the murder of Muslims in Afghanistan. The broader point of this article is the inept message by many Muslims and others, and I will state liberals, that the west has brought this violence upon itself.

            You state that the Taliban doesn’t represent Islam. However, I believe there is a broader acceptance in the Mideast by Muslims for the violence against the west. We hear some Muslims speak out against this violence however there are many Imam’s who preach it. Saudi Arabia plays a very difficult role in controlling their religious leaders. We see what happens in a country such as Iran when the mullahs take over.

            So I disagree with you here. Islam has everything to do with the violence in the Mideast and is relevant. If not then someone explain to me the violence between the Sunnis and Shiites.

          • Bob Hadley

            “If killing the Taliban is the same as ‘killing Muslims,’ then you can’t argue that the Taliban don’t represent Islam or Muslims.’”
            Try to stay focused. In my post below (which you seem to be responding to immediately above), I commented on the above quote: Saying killing Taliban is killing Muslims does not necessarily say that the Taliban doesn’t represent Muslims or Islam. I was NOT responding to Prager’s nonsensical article
            Now, in your post above, you change the subject. You’re now talking about 1) there being broader acceptance of Muslim violence against the West and that 2) Islam has everything to do with violence in the Mideast (e.g. Sunni and Shiites).
            I’m unsure what you mean by “acceptance” of Muslim violence against the West. But, I suspect that a lot of Muslims don’t oppose such violence out of fear. There is also some anti-American, anti-western sentiments. This is probably also a factor in many Muslims not opposing that particular brand of violence.
            And yes, there’s a lot of violence in the name of Islam. And this is a problem. Once upon a time there was violence, bloodshed and cruelty in the name of Christianity. There’s nothing new here. We all know that – I hope. What’s your point? Or, were you just trying to create a diversion?

          • KStrett

            You totally missed the point of the article.

            “My point was that just as members of Christian sects do not represent all Christians or Christianity in general, members of the Taliban do not represent all Muslims or Islam in general.”

            If you believe the Taliban doesn’t represent Islam, that is to say, you believe the Taliban has grossly perverted the teaching of Islam, you can’t simultaneously believe the reason Islamic radicals are attacking the west is for retribution. It is a self contradictory position.

          • Bob Hadley

            You didn’t address a word I said. Maybe you should read a post several times before responding. This is a matter of intellectual integrity. But I tend to omit “intellectual.”

            I was obviously NOT responding to the article. I WAS obviously responding to a post.

            Are you saying that I said that the Taliban attacks us because western policy kills Muslims? If so, you must have strained yourself to pull that one out of your backside.

            I tend to believe that the Taliban are Muslims. They claim to follow their scripture. Just like anyone who follows the Bible and esp. the New Testament is a Christian. The Taliban is a small and extreme sect of Islam, however.
            Read my posts carefully before getting entangled.

          • KStrett

            “I WAS obviously responding to a post.”

            And the post you were responding to was the point of the entire article!

            Many on the left argue that Islamic extremists are essentially not Muslims while simultaneously arguing the reason the these non-Muslim extremists are attacking the west is because we are killing Muslims that they just argued aren’t really Muslims. The entire argument is self contradictory.

            That was the point of the post! It went over your head.

            “Are you saying that I said that the Taliban attacks us because western policy kills Muslims?”

            I am saying the point of the article is going over your head. The point of the article is hypocrisy not whether Muslim extremists count as real Muslims.

            “I tend to believe that the Taliban are Muslims”

            You keep comparing the Muslim extremists to Christians.

            If the Bible teaches X, and a sect who claims to be Christian teaches Y, the sect is teaching something other than Christianity, even though they use Christian terminology.

            This is why Christians don’t consider groups like Mormons, Moonies, or the Branch Davidians to be Christian.

            If a group of people started murdering people in the name of Gandhi are they following the teachings of Gandhi?

          • Bob Hadley

            “And the post you were responding to was the point of the entire article!”

            Wrong, as usual. You need to read Mr. Ned’s post and my post again, after you’ve taken a bunch of deep breaths. Mr. Ned was making a particular point that was a spin-off of one of the points in the article. I responded to that spin-off point.

            Again, I was not responding to the main point of the article, directly or otherwise.

            “Many on the left argue that Islamic extremists are essentially not Muslims while simultaneously arguing the reason the these non-Muslim extremists are attacking the west is because we are killing Muslims that they just argued aren’t really Muslims”

            First, I have NOT argued that. So why make that point in response to my post??????

            Second, I am unaware that any leftist have made that argument (as you’ve presented it above). It’s possible that a few on the Left have said that. But, more likely, you just made that up.

            You might look at that Leftist Pat Buchanan and that pinko Glenn Beck. They’ve both said that we are attacked by Muslim extremists because of our foreign policies.

            “You keep comparing the Muslim extremists to Christians.”

            Here, you could hardly be more wrong. You keep misreading my posts. You’re searching for easy targets. You need to employ critical thinking. Here’s a hint: you can be negative without being critical and you can be critical without being negative.

            There is no comparison between the acts of the Taliban and the acts of Christian sects like the Moonies. There may be some comparisons between the acts of the Taliban and of certain Christian groups centuries ago, but certainly not today.

            Here, I made a minor point that you perverted and seized on. The Moonies are a fringe (and non-violent) Christian group and the Taliban is a fringe (and extremely violent) Muslim group. Where’s the comparison?????

            “If the Bible teaches X, and a sect who claims to be Christian teaches Y, the sect is teaching something other than Christianity, even though they use Christian terminology.”

            First, we’re talking primarily New Testament here. The problem is that everyone has their own interpretation of what “X” says. What you say is “X” others say is “Y,” and vice versa. Scriptures are subject to wide interpretation.

            Even things that are set forth in “black and white” can be misinterpreted (e.g. your repeated perversions of my posts).

            That’s why if someone calls himself a follower and if he does use the pertinent scripture as a guide and as inspiration (no matter how perversely), then I consider him to be a follower of that religion.

            “This is why Christians don’t consider groups like Mormons, Moonies, or the Branch Davidians to be Christian.”
            Some mainstream Christians consider these groups to be Christian, and some don’t. Mainstream Christians are highly diverse.
            In part, this is a matter of semantics. If you want to call these groups non-Chrisitans, then go ahead. it doesn’t matter.

          • KStrett

            “Wrong, as usual. ”

            The first post you responded to was:

            “Well, you can’t have it both ways. If killing the Taliban is the same as “killing Muslims,” then you can’t argue that the Taliban don’t represent Islam or Muslims.” Well put Bernie.”

            You responded with:

            “You can make that argument very effectively and logically. The Taliban….”

            You missed the point. The initial response was about the lefts hypocrisy. “Great point Bernie” means he was validating the point of the article but you responded as if the comment meant he was arguing about whether Muslim extremists count as representing Islam.

            “. It’s possible that a few on the Left have said that. But, more likely, you just made that up.”

            You can not seriously argue that the left does not believe Islamic extremists are attacking the west because of foreign policy.

            The majority of comments coming from the left in the wake of 9-11 were predicated on that point! The chickens have come home to roost……. sound familiar?

            “You might look at that Leftist Pat Buchanan and that pinko Glenn Beck.”

            Buchanan is an isolationist and Beck believes Islamic extremism is a huge threat to the west.They both have different positions than the far left.

            Taking quotes out of context doesn’t change my point. Quote mining doesn’t change the fact the left was monumentally blaming foreign policy on the attack.

            “Here, I made a minor point that you perverted and seized on. The Moonies are a fringe (and non-violent) Christian group and the Taliban is a fringe (and extremely violent) Muslim group. Where’s the
            comparison?????”

            The majority of Christians do not consider Moonies or any other fringe group you mentioned to be Christians. Christians do not consider Mormon doctrine remotely close to Christian doctrine.

            What about Islam? Do they consider radical Islam’s teachings consistent with the Quran and Muhammad?

            “If you want to call these groups non-Chrisitans, then go ahead. it doesn’t matter.”

            It does matter. If a large amount of Muslims believe that the extremists are part of Islam, that is a huge problem.

            “Scriptures are subject to wide interpretation.”

            No they are not. Paul was leaving sandal prints on the back side of anyone who was teaching incorrect doctrine..

            You are attempting to use deconstructionism to prove your point.

            “Some mainstream Christians consider these groups to be Christian, and some don’t.”

            This is completely false! No mainstream Christian believes that Mormonism or any group you mentioned is remotely close to Christian doctrine.

            “That’s why if someone calls himself a follower and if he does use the pertinent scripture as a guide and as inspiration (no matter how perversely), then I consider him to be a follower of that religion.”

            This is why you completely ignored my question about Gandhi.

            If a group of people started murdering people in the name of Gandhi are they following the teachings of Gandhi?

            The answer is No. Gandhi did not teach it was permissible murder people. If a group of people claimed he did, they are not following Gandhi, are they?

            Jesus did not teach it was permissible to murder people either. Jesus and the Apostles all died horrible deaths with the exception of John. In fact, they didn’t even put up a fight, even though they would have been justified in doing so.

            When Jesus was cited in the past as justification for murdering people, there weren’t following what Jesus taught, were they?

            What about Muhammad? There was a brief period in the beginning where he attempted to convert people to Islam without killing people but when this didn’t work he reverted to a convert or die tactic and started invading counties in the name of Islam.

  • EddieD_Boston

    You’re right Bernie. More Muslims are killed by Muslims. Too obvious for a liberals to comprehend. It’s like what goes on in the African-American community. Most murders in America are black on black but liberals blame everybody but the guy with the gun. They blame the NRA. Do they really believe the brotha from da ‘hood has an NRA membership and a license to carry? The depth of a liberal’s cluelessness is astounding. “

    • Bob Hadley

      According to your construct, I’m not a liberal nor are most of those I know who are to my left. Come to think of it, I know very few who fit your construct of a liberal.

      • Tim Ned

        Interesting Bob; although I don’t agree with the Hannity’s
        and others who call Obama’s trips to the Mideast apology tours, it is quite
        evident that liberals, and Obama, believe we influence the violence towards
        us. Obama’s tours, whatever you choose
        to call them, are evident of that in his words spoken. Those of us who have traveled to the Mideast
        extensively see the poverty, enslavement of children and women, and abuse of
        power. The problems in the Mideast are
        simply a matter of those in power unwilling to release it. And what makes it much more dangerous is that
        this power is wrapped in an enigma of bad religion. In my view, liberals believe that resolution
        to those problems can be accomplished through our politics. From someone who has been there extensively,
        they cannot. Revolution of this
        perverted power is the only answer.

        • Bob Hadley

          Huh?????

          You were hardly addressing my post. As to your post, what has Pres. Obama or other liberal politicians said or done that expresses that mideastern nations’ problems can be resolved through our politics? It sounds like you’ve created a strawman.

          At most, Pres. Obama and CERTAIN other liberals believe that we influence mideastern violence toward us only in a very marginal way. Pres. Obama has been VERY aggressive in the war on terrorists, in more ways than one.

          BTW, the likes of that flaming liberal Pat Buchanan attributed 9/11 to our policies. If I’m not mistaken, so did Glenn Beck in one of his screeds.

          As to my post above, my point was that I can’t remember a liberal denying the widely=known fact that black-on-black or Muslim-on-Muslim crime is more pervasive than black-on-white or Muslim-on-white crime. I’m not saying that there aren’t those “squishy” or extreme ones who make excuses for them. But I think the vast number of liberals (how many tens of millions voted for that leftist Pres. Obama?) probably balance favoring inclusive policies with aggressive enforcement of criminal laws on all.

          As far as I can tell, in the Black community there is general knowledge that black-on-black crime is a real problem. Many Black leaders – including that whipping boy Jesse Jackson – preach, harangue, lecture, cry about this problem when addressing Blacks.

          It is NOT inconsistent for these same Black leaders to harangue about lack of opportunity when addressing general audiences.

  • DonaldYoungsRevenge

    One of the best books on the market for understanding the cult of Islam was written by Joel Richardson titled The Islamic-Anti Christ. He has had many exchanges with Muslims, with the Muslim in the street and with their scholars. All his research came from the work of the more popular Islamic scholars. The Muslim prophet who goes by the name Muhammad was as evil as they come. He was a murderer and a butcher and sexual pervert. This is historical fact. Islam will always hate the Jew and will always be making every effort to wipe them off the face of the earth. Islam will always use dishonesty and deceit to advace their “religion.” They intend to rule the entire world at all cost. Until our political leaders and our blinded journalist come to understand this we are stuck on stupid. All Muslims have the potential to be radical due to their blind allegiance to Muhammad and the Koran. Not all Muslim act on that potential but are capable of being herded in that direction.

  • TheGoodDoctor

    Dennis: The leftists do not support terror? That is exactly who they are, whether it is in the killing fields and ditches or by striving to ensure that nothing reliable stays that way long enough for mere citizens to have confidence in the so-called state, which is nothing more than the “current state of affairs” for the single moment and then, whoosh!, gone with the hot air it blows.

  • MarioG

    Prager should have included Iraq, where we liberated millions of Iraqi Muslims who were being brutalized by a Muslim tyrant, and gave them an epic opportunity to build a country based on freedom and liberty. The opposition to this and the chaos lies at the feet of the Shia and Sunni radicals. The vast majority of Iraqis support the multi-ethnic, multi-party democracy that succeeded the liberation.

  • GlenFS

    Too bad neither the left nor would be jihadists are rational enough to appreciate the facts of the matter. The jihadists are blind with hate and the left is just blind.

  • Brian Fr Langley

    Unhappily your ethical arguments don’t hold sway in Sharia law. (the ethic of Islam) While the Judeo- Christian ethic calls for loving your neighbour as yourself, Sharia law on the other hand calls for not suffering an infidel as a neighbour. (just a modicum of research will bear this out) That we are not descending into a gigantic clash of civilizations is simply a leftist (commie) liberal fantasy. Islam has been recruiting converts by the sword since it’s inception. It’s attempts at world domination only ended with the defeat of the Ottoman Empire (they sided with the Germans) at the end of WW1, barely 100 years ago) Their Caliph (the Sultan of the Ottomans) was forced to abdicate. They’ve been trying to re-establish another united caliphate ever since. (The Ottoman caliphate by the way was a political overlord of both Shia and Sunni Muslims, that is Islam is politically unified under a strong caliphate) As well the Boston Bombers specifically mentioned restoring the caliphate as one of their goals. There is not 1 chance in a million this is going to get better, Sharia law simply will not allow it.

    • http://Horrorfilmmusic.com/ Ramon Espinosa

      Your right put this on every blog in Arabic

  • veeper

    I’m afraid you argument won’t wash with muslims….

    because it’s ok for muslims to kill muslims…

    but, it’s not ok for westerners to kill muslims no matter WHAT!!

    • JDinSTL

      Prager has always been a favorite of mine. I used to listen to him on WABC when I lived in New York. He has tremendous insight and could actually have written the Book of Hebrews. Yes, he’s that skilled with logical evidence and persuasive proof.

      I used to rest easy believing that the “truth will out” and as people grew and matured, they’d come to the truth.

      I no longer believe any of that.