from NY to Israel Sultan Reveals
The Stories Behind the News

Is it Muslim Rage or its Causes that Threatens Us?

Posted: 23 Mar 2010 07:57 PM PDT

The debate over how to handle Islamic terrorism essentially
comes down to those who advocate managing Islam in order to control its
propensity for violence, and those who believe that instead we should be
managing anything and everything that might provoke Muslim
rage.

While controlling violence by managing Islam is the logical and
direct approach, the weight of the establishment in numerous countries has
come down on the side of suppressing all things that might provoke Muslim
rage. This disturbing position expresses itself in numerous ways, whether
it was the censorship of the Mohammed cartoons, the ongoing attempt to
blame Israel for attacks on US troops, or the entire grand theory of the
left which blames all Muslim violence on the domestic and foreign policies
of their targets.

Given the choice between blaming the criminal for
his crimes, or his victims for having provoked him-- the political and
cultural elites of the very countries targeted for terror have chosen to
turn the blame inward. They have placed their sordid faith in the belief
that the best way to manage Islamic rage, is by relentlessly appeasing and
avoiding any provocations that might cause it to flare up.

This
phenomenon is often seen in abuse victims who have to cope with their
abuser's enraged violence. By accepting responsibility for being the cause
of his anger, they make it seem controllable and predictable. Their coping
mechanism is to blame themselves, rather than face the real problem, which
is that they live together with a violent and dangerous individual, who
will sooner or later kill them. This is the relationship between the West
and Islam.

The victim accepts the abuser's narrative that he is a
good and decent person, unless provoked. So too the civilized world
accepts Islam's narrative that it is the Religion of Peace, and that it is
peaceful, unless it is provoked. By accepting the enemy's narrative, the
victim accepts the blame for his blows and assaults, and comes to feel
that controlling the abuser's rage is their duty. So too the civilized
world accepts that Islamic terrorism is its fault, and that it must
"behave better" in order to avoid future blowups. Meanwhile the smallest
requests of the Muslim world that it behave better are met with outrage
and anger, much as the abuser explodes into a rage at any insinuation that
he has an anger management problem.

By identifying with the abuser,
victims take on a peculiar form of empowerment. By joining in their own
abuse, they become the abuser, winning victories over their own
helplessness. The growing identification by the West with Muslims can be
viewed in that light. Today the civilized world is abusing itself, and
after every lesson, it opens the door to usher in more Muslims to violate
its cities, murder its citizens and work toward their Endlosung, their
Final Solution for the free world, whether it is Al-Andalus, Eurabia,
Palestine, Amerabia-- it is still death by any name.

But one of
the ugliest expressions of his mindset is when the abuser enlists the
victim in finding him more victims to abuse. This occurs when abuse
victims help abuse their own children or lure in other women to be abused.
At this point the identification of the victim with the abuser is so
total, that they begin to take an active joy in his crimes. What else can
one make of the relish and hate with which so many Europeans pursued
Yugoslavia and now pursue Israel. While Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan
openly threatens the ethnic cleansing of Christians if they don't cease
complaining about Armenian genocide, Europe howls outraged over Israel.
And its own cities burn and its own citizens die at the very hands of the
people they are so eager to fight beside.

This is what happens when rather than
dealing with the rage, you instead try to dampen the causes of the rage.
The problem of Islamic rage is not caused by foreign policy or global
warming or the rain in Al-Andalus. It is caused by the Muslim belief that
they have both the right and the power to express their anger through
violence. It may not be possible to do anything about their sense of
right, because it is not up to us to reform the morality or the morally
retarded. But we can do something about that sense of power. And we can
begin by refusing to tolerate their anger.

When cartoons which
suggest that Islam is a violent religion are censored because Muslims
might react with violence, the serpent has officially swallowed its own
tail. The very idea that we must censor any suggestions that Muslims are
violent for fear that they might kill us, adequately telegraphs the mental
paradoxes and hypocrisies required to enact such a policy. It is not
driven by sensitivity or open-mindedness, but by a cloak of self-deception
thrown over naked fear.

Meanwhile the same US military brass which
covered up Nidal Malik Hasan's violent Islamism, both before and after his
attack, is sending signals that the real threat to the lives of US
soldiers is Israeli housing. In fact of course Israeli houses have not
killed anyone. Houses rarely do unless they fall on a wicked witch in the
fabled land of Oz. It is killers, not houses, that kill. Hasan was an
enemy from within. One of those friendly Religion of Peace types whose
poor sensitive feelings every level of government has spent so much time
nurturing. Yet none of it prevented him opening fire on the unarmed
soldiers he was supposed to care for. Instead all the years of tolerating
his growing homicidal rage sent him the signal that his anger was
justified and that he could act with impunity.

What truly
endangers the lives of US soldiers and civilians is the extraordinary
tolerance provided to Islam, the willingness of our leaders to minimize
and even justify their anger as legitimate. Which nurtures their anger and
takes them down the path to seeing it through, as they see even their
enemies confess and act guilty before them. And that seals their
fate.

Every excuse made for Islamic terrorism, ends up causing
exactly that which it claims to want to prevent. And yet the modern
cottage industry of the media and academic world in numerous countries is
justifying Islamic terrorism, penning books and articles that defend those
explosions of violent rage. Always willing to help the abuser find new
victims.

The left believed that criminals were simply the product of
social conditions that forced them to express their anger and helplessness
through crime. And so the left coddled criminals, and crime spiraled out
of control. A new generation of politicians bolstered by outraged voters
helped shut down these experiments in reform in the United States. But
when the criminals were being coddled, the entire society found itself in
prison because of them. So too today when Islam is coddled, everyone who
lives side by side with them finds themselves in prison.

It is
important to remember this essential split, between those who favor
managing Islamic anger and those who favor managing anything that might
provoke that anger. It is the great debate of our time, between the
courageous and the cowards, between the warriors and the appeasers,
between the defenders and the victim/abusers. Only by confronting Islamic
anger, can we put a stop to it. And for as long as we try to control its
causes, censoring ourselves, burning our own books and sacrificing new
victims to its insatiable hate, that rage will grow until it consumes us
all.