In all of the discussions as to whether or not Islam is a peaceful religion, the public has been assured, by various spokespersons, that only a small percentage of Muslims are militant: it is they who have hijacked the religion.  Such discussions have become prevalent primarily as a result of all the Muslim-induced terrorism that has been inflicted on the world in the past four decades and, secondarily, from people who claim that from their study of history the militants of today do not represent anything new.  They contend that Islam, from its inception, was always controlled by fanatics.

On various political programs, spokespersons for Islam have assured the interviewer and the American people that only about 5 – 10% of Muslims are militant.  When presented as such, it would seem that numbers truly are small.

Using simple arithmetic, let us convert percent into actual numbers and see what these numbers reveal.  In doing these simple conversions, I will be using average numbers.

There are between 1.0 to 1.5 billion Muslims in the world.
5% of 1.3 billion is 65 million.
65 million is about 21% of the population of the USA.
65 million is a lot of people.
65 million fanatical Muslims coupled to their Koranic mandate to dominate the world and considering Islam’s history of violence  becomes a very frightening statistic.

There are about 3 million Muslims in the USA.  President Barack Obama, in his speech on Islam in Cairo used the figure of “seven million American Muslims.”

5% of 3 million is 150 thousand fanatical Muslims just in the US.  150 thousand is the approximate population of cities such as Vancouver, Washington, Springfield, Missouri or Patterson, New Jersey.
To many people, the thought of 150 thousand fanatical Muslims bent on destroying the USA is frightening: they could do a lot of damage.

Dr. Emanuel Tanay, a well-known and well-respected psychiatrist. is purported to have written “A German’s View on Islam” in which he compares what happened in Russia, Germany, Italy and Japan with what is occurring today with Islam throughout the world.

“A man, whose family was German aristocracy prior to World War II, owned a number of large industries and estates. When asked how many German people were true Nazis, the answer he gave can guide our attitude toward fanaticism. ‘Very few people were true Nazis,’ he said, ‘but many enjoyed the return of German pride, and many more were too busy to care. I was one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. So, the majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of the world had come. My family lost everything. I ended up in a concentration camp and the Allies destroyed my factories.’

“We are told again and again by ‘experts’ and ‘talking heads’ that Islam is the religion of peace and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace.  Although this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant.  It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the specter of fanatics rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam.

“The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history; it is the fanatics who march…it is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars worldwide.  It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in an Islamic wave. It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or honour-kill.  It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque.  It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape victims and homosexuals.
It is the fanatics who teach their young to kill and to become suicide
bombers..

“The hard, quantifiable fact is that the peaceful majority, the ’silent majority,’ is cowed and extraneous.

“Communist Russia was comprised of Russians who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20 million people.

“The peaceful majority were irrelevant. China ’s huge population
was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people.

“The average Japanese individual prior to World War II was not a warmongering sadist.  Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across Southeast Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians; most killed by sword, shovel, and bayonet.

“And who can forget Rwanda , which collapsed into butchery. Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans were ‘peace loving’?

“History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for all our powers of reason, we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of points:

“Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence.  Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don’t speak up, because like my friend from Germany, they will awaken one day and find that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun.

“Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs, Afghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, and many others have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until it was too late.  As for us who watch it all unfold, we must pay attention to the only group that counts–the fanatics who threaten our way of life.”

One lesson to be learned from this exercise in simple arithmetic is to be wary of the way people use numbers, especially if they have something to hide.

The building of the mosque in NYC has generated arguments pro and con along with great emotion.  Recently, one of the best defense of the building of the mosque was offered by Reverend Travis Norvell, Pastor of the St Charles Avenue Baptist Church in New Orleans, LA.  in an opinion piece that appeared in the Times Picayune on (TP) 8/25/2010.

Unfortunately, there were some aspects of the defense that required correction and an alternate point of view.

My very close friend wrote such a response but has not heard from the T-P and is assuming that the TP is not going to publish his views.  This was not surprising since the TP is considered a political left newspaper and the political left seems to be intent on getting only one point of view heard.  He has given me permission to put his opinion on my blog.  Here it is.

Dear Editor:

I am writing to present an alternate view to that of Reverend Norvell who ((8/25/2010) defended the building of a mosque on private grounds near Ground Zero in New York City on the basis of freedom of religion and supported with examples from colonial American history.

For many Americans the issue is not nor ever has been freedom of religion – a constitutional guarantee – but the meaning of the mosque, i.e., what will this 15 story mosque/cultural center on Ground Zero truly represent?  Ground Zero represents the most horrific terrorist attack ever by Muslims on Americans and in America.  We contend that the mosque is not being built for promoting mutual respect and tolerance, as claimed, but for advancing the aims of Islam.

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf was less than truthful with the American public as to the purpose of the mosque.  Only recently has he promoted the view of improving relations with Islam.   From its inception, everything from the naming of the Cordoba project to the statements of various Imams was that this mosque would be a symbol of Muslim triumphalism.

Triumphalism, throughout the Muslim world implies a victory for Islam over inferior and decadent western cultures and proof of  the truthfulness of the Koranic mandate of Islam becoming the dominant world religion.  Rauf’s philosophy is stated in his 2005 book “What’s Right With Islam Is What’s Right With America.”  It is unlikely this mosque would  promote tolerance and understanding based on his writings, his refusal to acknowledge Hamas as a terrorist group, his belief that U.S. foreign policy was responsible for the 9/11 attacks, and his statement that the U.S. was “an accessory to the crime” of 9/11.

It has been well documented that mosques in the US primarily have been built and supported by Saudi Arabia and its brand of Islam – Wahbbism.  They have been teaching and preaching hatred of infidels and violence, they have been breeding grounds for terrorists and they have been used as recruiting sites of terrorists as did the mosque in Germany.   Recently, in Hamburg, Germany, the mosque associated with the 9/11 murderers was shut down by the German government because it concluded, after a decade of experience, that the Imams were teaching and preaching hate, anti-western values and jihadism rather than promoting understanding and tolerance it was supposed to do..

The size, purpose and siting of this mosque goes along with the past history of Islam.” Islam destroyed other cultures and their religious symbols and erected mosques on the holy sites of its victims: in Jerusalem there is the Dome of the Rock and the El Aksa mosque built on the site where the Jewish holy temple (destroyed by the Romans, later conquered by Muslims) stood; these mosques are not known for promoting tolerance and understanding.  Thousands of Christian Churches and Hindu temples were converted into mosques upon conquest by Muslims, exemplified by the Sancta Sofia in Constantinople.  Muslims intentionally destroyed two magnificent Buddha statues in Afghanistan (2001) on orders from Mullah Mohammad Omar for no justifiable reason other than the Taliban declared them to be “idols” – an offense to Islam under sharia law.

Building this mosque is not akin to the experiences of colonial America, as Norvell contends,  but to the Carmelite nuns building a convent at Aushwitz in the 1980s and their building a huge cross – the Pope’s Cross. – and smaller crosses.  Terrible consequences resulted from those deliberate and disgraceful actions of Catholic triumphalism.   The convent was moved.  The issue of the crosses is partially resolved and a constant cause of religiously induced rancor.

Retired firefighter Jack McLaughlin said: “Part of the  plane landed (here)” referring to the area where the mosque is to be erected.  The pilots, with malice aforethought, were Muslims on a holy mission intent on destruction.  Therefore, that area may be considered part of Ground Zero, not just near Ground Zero.

Thus, the case could be made that anyone supporting the building of the mosque in that particular place is working to undermine the American republic and the greatest experiment in democracy the world ever experienced.

The issue is not Americans not having sensitivity to Islam but Islam demonstrating its sensitivity to American concerns.

The question becomes: How far away from Ground Zero should the mosque be built?  My answer: far enough away so that Ground Zero cannot be seen from any of its windows or its roof top.

SG

(He gave his full name, address, phone number and e-mail address which he asked me not to make public for now.)

Recently Nancy Ratzan, President of the National Council of Jewish Women released a statement urging the Jewish people, during this ten day period – Rosh Hashanah through Yom Kippur – dedicated to introspection and decision making to rededicate their efforts to leading a good life with social justice as one of the highest priorities.  The precipitating event that led to this statement was what she perceived to be an “escalating bias and violence directed at the American Muslim community.” She said: “Let us heed Isaiah’s call to cry out with a ‘full throat and without restraint’ against the injustice of persecution and discrimination against our Muslim neighbors.”

For the record, NCJW “is a grassroots organization of volunteers and advocates who turn progressive ideals into action.” “Inspired by Jewish values, NCJW strives for social justice by improving the quality of life for women, children, and families and by safeguarding individual rights and freedoms.”

It is very difficult for anyone to disagree with such noble thoughts nor should any one want to disagree.  Certainly any American who understands what this great nation truly stands for does not want to engage in hate or tolerate discrimination against any ethnic/religious/sexual orientation etc. group.

With that being said, I find that the statement of the NCJW is too parochial and too confining.  Thus, I sent the following e-mail to
Sammie Moshenberg, Director of Washington Operations  of the NCJW.

Sammie Moshenberg
Director of Washington Operations
National Council of Jewish Women (NCJW)

Yes, during Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, Jews should reflect on being a force for progressive social change.  However If we are going to work against injustice perhaps we should consider working against the injustices inflicted by Islam against women (stoning!) and the rest of the world.  Perhaps we should work against Islam engaging in horrific deeds such as beheading innocent Jews such as Daniel Pearl, or the issuing of Fatwas (death threats) against intellectuals such as Salmon Rushdie or anyone else who any Iman, at anytime and any place, decides has insulted Islam or is interfering with Islam achieving its aims, or their killing of Van Gogh, or demanding that of teaching and preaching hate and recruiting people to become suicide bombers and paying their families thousands of dollars for raising children who then blow themselves up in public places while murdering innocent people including children, or raining thousands of missiles on our fellow Jews in Israel etc.

In the name of social justice perhaps we should work to educate the world that Islam, in its current form, is a cancer in the world which if not confronted by those of us who are truly interested in social and political justice will continue to metastasize and spread its toxicity
throughout the world.

Perhaps such efforts on our part would help bring about the reformation in Islam that is so badly needed so that it can live at peace with people who think or believe differently.