What hath 9/11 wrought?

Yesterday I said that we should shun the official 9/11 anniversary ceremonies, because

the result of 9/11 has not been Western self-defense against Islam, but the prohibition of Western self-defense against Islam. And all the official 9/11 commemorations, notwithstanding their patriotic appearance, will carry that message of American and Western surrender. And that is why they should be avoided.

In her column yesterday, Diana West made a similar point, but even more strongly. She says that 9/11 is bringing about a new golden age of Islam, characterized by active American empowerment of the Islamic program of Islamic supremacy over non-Muslims:

In Afghanistan, our forces are now “trained on the sanctity of the holy book (the Koran) and go to significant steps to protect it,” as the official International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) website reported last year.

Are they similarly trained to take “significant steps” to “protect” other books? Hardly. It’s reckless and irresponsible to demand that troops make the protection of any book a priority in a war zone. But it’s not merely the case that U.S. troops have become protectors of the Koran in the decade following 9/11. “Never talk badly about the Qu’ran or its contents,” ISAF ordered troops earlier this year [italics added].

And where does the rule not to speak badly about the Koran and Islam come from? From Islam itself. The Islamic law not only prohibits speaking badly about Islam, it makes it a capital offense. Now of course the U.S. military authorities will not execute an American officer who speaks badly about the Koran, but they will kill his career. And that is enough to put the U.S. substantially in compliance with sharia. We are doing the bidding of Islam. Indeed, we are now the universal enforcer of Islam, as I said in June 2009 about President Obama’s Cairo speech in which he declared that he would oppose anti-Islamic “stereotypes” wherever they appear:

By defining the responsibility of the President of the United States as “fighting against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear,” which means nothing less than punishing and silencing truthful criticism of Islam, wherever it appears, Obama has defined the United States of America as an agent of the Islamic agenda to Islamize the world.

Diana West’s column continues:

Did the Pentagon restrict language about “Mein Kampf” or the “Communist Manifesto”? They, too, were blueprints for world conquest that the United States opposed. Of course not. But the Koran is different. It is protected by Islamic law, and that’s enough for the Pentagon. Not incidentally, ISAF further cautioned troops to direct suspects to remove any Korans from the vicinity before troops conduct a search—no doubt for the unstated fear that infidel troops might defile the protected book.

None may “touch the Qu’ran except in the state of ritual purity,” the Islamic law book Reliance of the Traveller declares. And “ritual purity,” naturally, is a state a non-Muslim can never, ever achieve under Islam.

Since when did Uncle Sam incorporate Islamic law into military protocols?

Since 9/11.

Now take the State Department, symbol and nerve center of U.S. action on the world stage.

In July, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced a collaborative effort between the United States and the OIC, newly repackaged as Organization of the Islamic Cooperation. (It used to be “C” for Conference.) The get-together planned for Washington, D.C., is supposed to implement a non-binding resolution against religious “stereotyping” (read: Islamic “stereotyping”) that passed last March at the U.N. Human Rights Council. Such “stereotyping,” of course, includes everything from honest assessments of the links between Islamic doctrine and Islamic terrorism to political cartoons. This makes this U.S.-led international effort nothing short of a sinister attempt to snuff free speech about Islam. And that sure sounds like a U.S.-co-chaired assault on the First Amendment. Not only is this treachery on the part of the U.S. government, it also happens to be part and parcel of the OIC’s official 10-year-plan. [See ten-year plan here.]

Since when did Uncle Sam get in the business of doing the bidding of the OIC?

Since 9/11.

This is just a snapshot of what the rush toward Islamization as a goal of national policy looks like, 10 years since the Twin Towers collapsed in a colossal cloud of dust and fire. The air has cleared, but the appeasement and the Islamization go on. Thus, a golden age begins, but unless we throw off this mental yoke of submission, it cannot be our own.

[End of West column]

- end of initial entry -

Mark A. writes:

I think this calls for a revisiting of your post of November 1, 2002 (copied below). 9/11 was one of the most evil acts (second perhaps only to rap music) committed by a minority/non-Western group against the majority American society. George W. Bush, perhaps the most liberal President since LBJ, only knew how to respond to this act by following Auster’s First Law of Majority-Minority Relations: he (1) restricted the normal freedoms and activities of ordinary Americans (e.g. TSA) and (2) sent thousands of working class white Americans in the American armed forces to their graves in order to bring “freedom” to places like Afghanistan and Iraq (which are now in the process of using that freedom to install Islamic governments and Islamic law).

The First Law of Majority-Minority Relations

Having read Ann Coulter’s column on the media’s amazing attempts to downplay the fact that John Muhammad is … um, a Muhammedan, I think it may be time to re-state Auster’s First Law of Majority-Minority Relations in Liberal Society:

The worse any designated minority or alien group behaves in a liberal society, the bigger become the lies of Political Correctess in covering up for that group. Thus, instead of the revelation over the last 14 months of Islam’s dangerous and savage character leading (as would happen in a rational world) to a major discrediting of Muslims, or at least to a more sceptical attitude toward them, it has led to their being more favored, more coddled and more protected from criticism than ever before. They now get a whole new level of solicitous, sycophantic treatment, ranging from PBS “histories” of Islam that are more full of uncritical celebration of their subject than a tourist travelogue, to the media’s constant attacks on the rest of us for indulging in an anti-Muslim backlash which has somehow never occurred.

That last point leads us to the first corrolary of Auster’s First Law of Majority/Minority Relations in Liberal Society: The more egregiously any non-Western or non-white group behaves, the more evil whites are made to appear for noticing and drawing rational conclusions about that group’s bad behavior.

The First Law and its corrolary are intrinsic to liberalism. Once the equality of all human groups is accepted as a given, any facts that make a minority or foreign group seem worse than the majority native group must be either covered up or blamed on the majority.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at November 01, 2002 01:16 AM

LA replies:

Thanks for finding that, since that entry is where I first directly related the First Law to the 9/11 attack. And it was written just a year after the attack. So it was already evident within a year of 9/11 that instead of being more sceptical about Muslims after 9/11, as normal human beings would have been, we had instead become aggressively more accepting and approving of them, showing how liberalism turns reality on its head.

James N. writes:

I don’t think celebrating defeats is a good idea.

Lydia McGrew writes:

Apropos of Diana West’s discussion of our special solicitude for the Koran in Afghanistan, I thought this story relevant. While showing such concern for the treatment of the Koran, our military burns shipments of Bibles to Afghanistan (not even willing to send them back to the church that sent them) as “trash” out of fear that they might be distributed. In other words, our military helps to enforce an Afghani ban on Bibles as contraband.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at September 10, 2011 03:18 PM | Send