Bushido and Islam: Creepily Similar

I RECEIVED an interesting email from a woman who calls herself Western Feminista, who has eloquently commented before at Talk About Islam Among Non-Muslims. She was struck by the strange similarity between Islam and Bushido. I thought we could use this in the same way as comparing Islam with Scientology (which I recommend here), in the sense that we may be able to get around some of the defensiveness non-Muslims have about Islam by talking about similar teachings in other religions. Here are some of the similarities Western Feminista found: Blind Submission: Devotion to the Emperor (as a direct descendant of the Sun Goddess, Amaterasu Omikami) and the view that the Emperor was an earthly agent of divine origin. His decisions and judgments were, by default, moral and legal. Muslims also revere Mohammad, the direct chosen Prophet by Allah (God). He will sit next to Allah interceding on behalf of believers on Judgment Day. It is his dictation of the word of Allah that make up the Koran that all Muslims must adhere to. His utterings are by default, moral and legal. Humiliation and Shame: The notions of "saving face" and the avoidance of shame have also been an integral part of Japanese culture for centuries. To admit one's wrongdoings, or worse the wrongdoings of an ancestor, would be a disgrace according to the belief in filial piety. Lower-ranking soldiers were often beaten for the “crime” of serving a superior's rice too slowly, and sick and wounded soldiers were treated with disgust. (Infringement of the Laws of War and Ethics (January 1945) “Many incapacitated soldiers, with a good chance of recovery, have been disposed of on the grounds that they are useless to the Emperor. A-17 Division Order commands medical officers to dispose of any sick and wounded who become a liability.”) Perceived insults from Allied prisoners were met with executions, and attempts to “shame” POWs by forcing them to bow, fight for food, etc., were routinely used. Women civilians were “shamed” by being used as “comfort women.” Islam is also a Shame/Honour-based culture — obsessed with keeping face, guarding against the threat of humiliation and over-the-top reactions to the slightest perceived insult. An excellent example is the Mo-toon worldwide frothing-at-the-mouth scenario, Theo Van Gough, the film “Submission,” Geert Wilders' stand against Islamification, a fatwa issued against Pokemon Toys…the list is innumerable and is growing daily. Dhimmis are “shamed” by having to pay protection tax (jizya). Women are subjugated in the name of “honour” daily. Free Thought Banned: In Bushido, the Confucian precepts also set the parameters for a samurai's unquestioning obedience to his daimyo. Within the Confucian context, a "Just War" was any undertaking that the ruler sought to fulfill. They could not be questioned by anyone because that would demonstrate disrespect for authority and a questioning of the authority's divine judgment. In Islam…“the verses of the Qur'an and the Sunnah summon people in general (with the most eloquent expression and the clearest exposition) to jihad, to warfare, to the armed forces, and all means of land and sea fighting." Those who can only find excuses, however, have been warned of extremely dreadful punishments and Allah has described them with the most unfortunate of names. He has reprimanded them for their cowardice and lack of spirit, and castigated them for their weakness and truancy. In this world, they will be surrounded by dishonour and in the next they will be surrounded by the fire from which they shall not escape though they may possess much wealth. The weaknesses of abstention and evasion of jihad are regarded by Allah as one of the major sins, and one of the seven sins that guarantee failure. (Al-Banna) We can also look to Islamic leaders for backup: “Keep on fighting for the application of Islamic law. If this state and nation wants to become great, safe, and at peace then it has to return to Islam one hundred percent without bargaining. If not, then it will be destroyed.” (Abu Bakar Bashir, spiritual leader of the Indonesian Mujahideen) "I am one of the servants of Allah. We do our duty of fighting for the sake of the religion of Allah. It is also our duty to send a call to all the people of the world to enjoy this great light and to embrace Islam and experience the happiness in Islam. Our primary mission is nothing but the furthering of this religion." (Osama bin Laden, May 1998) R-E-S-P-E-C-T: Bushido also stressed respect for others, however, the term others was very illusive and often manipulated to mean almost anyone or only a select few. POWs being held by the Japanese Imperial Army were taken on death marches, starved, beaten, beheaded, shot and certainly not respected…the mere fact that they had surrendered, sent them to the bottom of the food chain. We have seen lots of examples put forward by Islamic apologists stating the same thing — that Islam is a peaceful religion that accepts women, Christians and Jews with respect…the passages from the Koran are too many to show here that is not the case… War as a means to an end: Bushido sees war as an act that could purify the self, the nation, and ultimately the whole world. Within this framework, the supreme sacrifice of life itself was regarded as the purest of accomplishments. “Do not live in shame as a prisoner. Die, and leave no ignominious crime behind you.” Yamamoto Tsunetomo's Hagakure (1710) Ritual suicide (seppuku) was preferred over a life of shame (defeat), and was adopted as a means of war by the Japanese Imperial Army. (Kamikaze tactic during WWII — this was also consistent with the Bushido Code’s requirement of self-sacrifice.) The idea that war is a way of “purifying” the whole world is another area where Islam agrees — the whole globe should become Islamic. Islam means submission, and so the House of Islam includes those nations that have submitted to Islamic rule, which is to say those nations ruled by Sharia law. The rest of the world, which has not accepted Sharia law and so is not in a state of submission, exists in a state of rebellion or war with the will of Allah. It is incumbent on dar al-Islam to make war upon dar al-harb until such time that all nations submit to the will of Allah and accept Sharia law. Islam also believes the premise that dying while waging jihad is the purest of accomplishments…”But nothing compares to the honour of shahadah kubra (the supreme martyrdom) or the reward that is waiting for the Mujahideen.” (Al-Banna) Employment Opportunities: It was not unusual for civilians to be routinely slaughtered by the Japanese Imperial Army, as well as taken as forced labour for war projects. (Thai/Burma Railway used civilians taken from Indonesia as well as Malaya and other neighbouring SE Asian countries, as well as POWs.) Islam has a long history of taking slaves by force, and is currently still perpetrating horrors against indentured servants from other countries, especially in Saudi Arabia. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-11795356 Conclusion: The punishments meted out to civilians and POWs by the Imperial Japanese Army have been recorded by history as shocking — atrocities that still sicken to this day. The belief in their superiority over all others led to acts of pure evil being perpetrated, for which they were condemned by all western nations. Why then, does a doctrine that is easily aligned with Bushido still exist? (Bushido already having been condemned as inhuman and vile.) Why is this doctrine still being allowed to infiltrate our daily lives? Why does the media apologise and excuse it? Why do the politicians of the same nations that held war-crime tribunals against the JIA now trip over each other to appease the latest practitioners? At the end of WWII, a declaration was given to the Japanese to sign….one of the conditions read:

"We do not intend that the Japanese shall be enslaved as a race or destroyed as a nation...The Japanese Government shall remove all obstacles to the revival and strengthening of democratic tendencies among the Japanese people. Freedom of speech, of religion, and of thought, as well as respect for the fundamental human rights shall be established."

In other words, "No More Bushido." Why then, can I not say, "No More Islam" without being accused of hate speech? When I asked Western Feminista if I could reprint her analysis, she said yes, and then added: I sat down after watching the mini series “The Pacific” and Googled the JIA and Bushido and just picked out a few bits that struck me as being creepily similar. I thought it was strange that so many people compare Islam to Nazism (Jew hatred etc) — but I haven’t heard anyone looking at it from a “religious spiritual” side…everything the JIA did was in the name of the Emperor and the belief that he was a divine being unable to be criticized. (Even Hitler had people who doubted him…but the Emperor didn’t.) My Grandfather was on the Thai Burma railroad, and he always said that theirs was an ideology that encompassed every aspect of their lives, was completely irrational and evil to the core…

Read more...

Islam: What the West Needs to Know

AN EXCELLENT video you can use to help educate people is Islam: What the West Needs to Know. It is available on DVD, and that's probably the best way to share it — buy some extra copies and keep them in circulation, eventually loaning them to everyone in your social circle.

But if you want to share it online, it is available on Google Videos in its entirety. Here it is:

"Islam: What the West Needs to Know" on Google Videos

It's a great overview of the basic principles of Islam, and why non-Muslims ought to be concerned about it.

Read more...

What Really Makes Me Mad is Understandable

WHEN I TRY to educate my fellow non-Muslims about basic Islamic doctrine, they often automatically assume I hate Muslims. They don't have a way of reconciling my criticism with any model of the world they are familiar with, and the only way to understand me is to conclude I must just be a "hater" or have a prejudice against Arabs or Muslims. But I have found some success in clearing this up by explaining how I look at the whole subject. Something like this...

I think of Muslims as being divided into three categories. There are those who understand the doctrine well and believe in it and are committed to following its dictates. This is a relatively small percentage, although nobody knows how small. I would guess it is somewhere between five and twenty-five percent of Muslims. That's a pretty big range, I know, but like I said, it's hard to know for sure.

The second category of Muslims are those who know about the doctrine but secretly reject parts of it. They do it secretly because it says in the doctrine they are not allowed to reject any of it, and also because in many parts of the world it is physically dangerous to reject any part of Islamic doctrine publicly. I believe this group is another ten to twenty percent of Muslims. That's just a guess.

The third category is the biggest. These are Muslims who don't know what their own doctrine says. They grew up Muslim, their parents were Muslim, and they never thought of having a choice about being Muslim, but they've never been interested enough to find out what Islamic doctrine says.

With an understanding of the three categories, I can now explain that I do not hate "Muslims." What bothers me is that people in the first category — the true believers — are successfully exploiting the third and very large category of ignorant Muslims, and successfully fooling most of the non-Muslims.

And even that doesn't bother me as much as the fact that the true believing Muslims are successfully exploiting and fooling so many people simply because people refuse to look. It's not like the information is hard to find. The ignorant Muslims have not taken the time to explore their own doctrines enough to accept or reject them. And the ignorant non-Muslims essentially refuse to look. They make assumptions instead, and self-righteously defend their assumptions. But the doctrines are widely published and abundantly available. That's what really bothers me.

I feel like Winston Churchill must have felt during the 1930's. He read Mein Kampf. The book was available for anyone to read. Churchill was trying to get people to simply look, but for the most part people did not want to look for fear of what they would find. What a frustrating, angering situation. That's why I appear frustrated and angry sometimes when I'm talking to people. It is not hatred toward Muslims. It is anger at our ridiculous situation: A group is actively working toward a terrible goal which has been widely published in the open, but so many people do not want to know about it. Under the circumstances, I think intense frustration is a normal response.

Anyway, when I explain it this way, I think people better understand my passion for the subject and see it differently, and that helps them listen to whatever else I have to say. It prevents them from "shutting their ears," so to speak. It prevents them from just dismissing what I have to say (because they won't listen to "hatemongers" or prejudice people).

If you feel the same way, try explaining it to people when you can see they are misunderstanding your passion for the subject. And tell us how it worked (or didn't work) on Talk About Islam Among Non-Muslims.

Read more...

Geert Wilders Publicly Supports Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

LAST WEEK, the Gates of Vienna reported that the judge in Elisabeth's trial added a new charge against Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, prompting Elisabeth’s Voice to reactivate their fund-raising initiative to help Elisabeth meet her legal fees. The new charge is "denigrating religious symbols of a recognized religious group." The new charge is easier to prove, and it increases her chance of being convicted.

Now Geert Wilders has come out publicly and officially in support of Elisabeth. She received this email from Mr. Wilders:

The Austrian anti-jihad activist Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff is currently on trial in Vienna for speaking the truth about Islam. Her case is much like mine and that of all the other people in Europe who are being charged, tried, convicted, and silenced for daring to speak out against Islam.

Elisabeth is a courageous woman whose staunch defence of liberty, freedom of expression and the search for truth are an inspiration for us all. She is a beacon of light, not only for Austria but the entire West.

I fully support Elisabeth in her resistance to the oppression that has been forced upon her. And I especially support her in her defence against a charge brought by the Vienna court in an attempt to silence her.

It is important to defend those who are being prosecuted by the state for their convictions. We need to exercise our own right of speech on their behalf. If we do not speak out today for people like Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, we will all be silenced.

If you want to contribute to her defense, visit Elisabeth’s Voice and make a donation using PayPal. Or, if you prefer, you can send a bank transfer using the following information for international payments:

Raiffeisen Zentralbank Österreich
IBAN: AT513150042908021602
BIC: RZBAATWW

Made out to: Public Notary Mag. Martin Scheichenbauer, Hemmaweg 5, A-9342 Gurk

The defense fund is not under Elisabeth's control, and disbursements from it will be made solely to pay her legal fees.

If you are unable to contribute, please pass the word along to anyone who might be able to help. Post stories about Elisabeth on your Facebook page. Make comments on blogs. Email your friends. Talk about it to people you know. We all need to fight to keep Elisabeth and others like her from being silenced.

Here are more articles on Elisabeth:

Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff Versus Sharia

The Latest on Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

An Interview with Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

The Leading Edge of Freedom: How to Support Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

Elisabeth's Trial Has Begun

Read more...

Keeping Private Information Private at Spokeo

A NEW ONLINE USA phone book, Spokeo.com, has collected lots of personal information about you. They've got everything from photos you've posted on Facebook or the web, your credit score, photos of where you live, your income, your age, your home address.
But you can remove yourself by searching your name and then clicking on your name. A smaller window pops up. Go to the bottom of the smaller window and click on the Privacy link to remove yourself.
Once you put in your information and click, you will see a small sentence that tells you to check your email.
Go to your email and click on the "confirm" link. Within one day, you can check back and your information will be gone.

Read more...