Wednesday, April 26, 2006

I know this is the right thing to do, but wait…

I was reading the article NOW Do you believe it? on Always on Watch's fine blog and read very interesting comments on the post there. This is a post about a man named Zacharias Moussaoui, whom informed people already know about very well (uninformed people should follow the link above). The comments were very interesting and this post is in answer to some of those comments. I am being very general in this post, so I will not reproduce all or any of the comments here. I am jumping right into the discussion so it is better you read the comments over at Always on Watch first and then read here. Enjoy!

Should the US Government put Moussaoui to death, or should he get life imprisonment, or does he merit a more novel punishment like, say, working in a pig farm (good one!)? He would think he is a 'shaheed' (martyr) if he is killed and indeed this is what he has openly wished for. The Moslem world would certainly see him as a shaheed if he was executed by an infidel government.

But that's what they say and think when any Moslem dies fighting for Allah, killing innocent women and children. They blow themselves up on the streets, in the buses and the malls and then they're hailed as martyrs, heroes who died bravely fighting the Great Satan (USA) or Little Satan (Israel). What should we do then? Should we stop them from blowing themselves up? We try that but even that ends up with them dead. The way you guys are thinking about it, we lose no matter what.

What should we do then? Should we let this man live? Should we give him a room with his own bed, his prayer rug, his Koran and his private time so he can thank his sick Allah for choosing him for the job? And all at US taxpayer expense for the rest of this man’s natural life? Should we let his brothers (CAIR and the likes) on the outside constantly bitch (pardon my language) against the American system for letting him flush his Koran down the toilet (remember what happened in GITMO)? And should we then give him his lawyer too on the expense of the American government? Should we do all this just because we don’t want a bunch of bloodthirsty murderers 'thinking' that they won?

What about the 3000 people who lost their lives on 9/11 just because they happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time? Many of them may have never even heard about Islam. Some of them, I think, must have thought that Islam was a religion of peace and so did their relatives. But does Islam distinguish between people who think in a different way and those who do not? No matter what you say or think—Islam will go about doing what it is here to do, to subjugate you, all non Muslims.

Some say that Communism was defeated just by exposing it. Do you believe that that will work for Islam too? If you do, I am sorry to say, that’s a bunch of bull****. How can you even compare Communism with Islam? Unlike Communism, many Moslems (if not most) are true believers in Islam.

What would your answer be to someone who says 'I don’t give a **** about what you have to say about Islam, Allah wanted it this way, nothing you can say or do is going to change my beliefs in it.' Would you then again go about telling him, 'Dude, Islam has these problems, please understand' until he blows you to bits? Would you only then think about taking care of the problem the way it has to be dealt with?

Charles Martel knew what Islam was and he knew how to knock it back on its heels. Crusaders knew what Moslems were capable of and what they were ‘thinking’ and they handled the situation the way it should have been handled, at least at first. It was the fear that stopped them, the fear of someone winning against their Allah’s will; the fear that there was someone stronger, more powerful; the fear that now they were matched in their brutality and their actions; the fear that now their actions had even stronger reactions. It was the fear and not the love—it was our barbarity in answer to theirs and not the exposition of some flaws in their Koranic system. We just stopped short of winning it all—we were too nice.

‘Kill all the infidels wherever you find them…’ I say we match it with ‘kill all the Moslem terrorists wherever you find them…’ No matter how inhumane it sounds today, it will save lives; it will save the next generation and the generations after that. Let the terrorist live today and we will have millions of his kind eating, drinking and being merry at the expense of American tax payers.

I would rather have the shaheeds stuffed in coffins, or something cheaper.

No matter what happens, I will not give up on the Western Civilization that—even though I live in the East, in the heart of the barbaric religion called Islam—gives me hope, a hope that one day I and millions others like me can live in peace and the little children have no fear whatsoever of Allah, a barbaric god who has no mercy.

No matter what they think, I will not flag or fail, for this is what I live for and this is what Moslems plot against and kill for. We are at odds with each other. If I let their thinking and their strategies affect my thoughts and my plans, I have lost the war already; how could I expect to win otherwise? I am a fool if I do—and I don’t like to be one.

I am raising my voice today, and for any number of tomorrows, if needed. I will not hesitate to raise my hand against anyone who plots against Western Civilization. I have faith that I will be victorious. But because of their own faith, the Moslems will not change their mind about fighting against us.

Did you ever think of that?

5 comments:

Always On Watch said...

Avenging Apostate,
I've been waiting for your posting on this topic.

I found myself nodding my head in agreement:

It was the fear that stopped them, the fear of someone winning against their Allah’s will; the fear that there was someone stronger, more powerful; the fear that now they were matched in their brutality and their actions; the fear that now their actions had even stronger reactions. It was the fear and not the love—it was our barbarity in answer to theirs and not the exposition of some flaws in their Koranic system. We just stopped short of winning it all—we were too nice.

Does it all come down to Muslims will respect a strongman if the infidels flex muscle?

Now, does the West have the commitment to its civilization even to execute Moussaoui? I find myself shocked that the jury hasn't returned quickly--might not be a good sign.

friendlysaviour said...

Why not keep him alive until the next kidnapping of a Us citizen and then if they threaten to behead them, do the same to Moussoui live on al jazeera,
with a commentary telling them from now on it will be an eye for an eye. They can understand that.
Also give him a good dose of Delysid so he can enjoy the experience.

Always On Watch said...

Complete article from the April 29 WaPo:

It's 42 pages long and filled with complex questions that could explain why jurors in the death penalty trial of Zacarias Moussaoui completed their second full day of deliberations yesterday with no sign of when they will reach a verdict.
The 12-member jury is wading through a "special verdict form" that explores issues such as whether Moussaoui is responsible for all of the nearly 3,000 deaths Sept. 11, 2001, and whether executing him would make him a martyr. Jurors in every federal death case go through a similar exercise, which involves weighing the "aggravating factors" submitted by prosecutors against "mitigating factors" proposed by the defense.

The differences for these jurors are the nature of the questions and the subject matter -- the deadliest terrorist attack in U.S. history.

"No federal jury has ever seen an aggravator such as 3,000 people died," said Jonathan Shapiro, a defense lawyer who has tried death penalty cases at the same federal courthouse in Alexandria where the Moussaoui jurors are working on the seventh floor.

Usually, Shapiro said, mitigating factors suggested by defense lawyers involve things such as, " 'He's a good father; if you kill him, his kids will miss him . . .' The martyrdom thing definitely stands out here."

Not a word was heard yesterday from the jury, which has deliberated for 16 hours since getting the case Monday afternoon. On Tuesday, the nine men and three women asked the judge if they could have a dictionary, their only question thus far. U.S. District Judge Leonie M. Brinkema declined, saying jurors can only consider the evidence heard in court.

Moussaoui, 37, pleaded guilty last year to conspiring with al-Qaeda and is the only person convicted in the United States on charges stemming from the 2001 attacks. Earlier this month, after deliberating for 17 hours, the same jury found Moussaoui eligible for the death penalty, because his lies to the FBI when he was arrested in August 2001 allowed the Sept. 11 plot to go forward.

Jurors returned to U.S. District Court in Alexandria for an emotional second phase that featured testimony from several dozen family members of Sept. 11 victims, many of them sobbing on the stand.

If jurors do not agree unanimously that Moussaoui should be put to death, Brinkema will sentence him to life in prison with no chance of parole. She has indicated she will formally impose the sentence that day or the next.

Since the jurors are anonymous and little personal information is known about them, it will be difficult to determine the reasons for their verdict. But clues probably will be found in the verdict form.

The document provides a guide to the deliberations and also delves into the key issues in the case. Jurors must first determine whether prosecutors proved three "statutory aggravating factors" -- that Moussaoui committed his crimes "in an especially heinous, cruel or depraved matter," that he planned them to cause death and that he created a risk of death to others beyond the actual victims. Those would include people on the ground in New York when the World Trade Center collapsed.

If jurors find that prosecutors proved none of those factors, Moussaoui will get life in prison. If they find even one of them proven, jurors move on to seven other aggravators, such as Moussaoui's lack of remorse, the damage that Sept. 11 caused in Washington and New York and whether Moussaoui's actions "resulted in the deaths of approximately 3,000 people."

The jury is then required to consider the 23 mitigators, which include two questions about martyrdom and others that explore Moussaoui's mental state and troubled childhood and whether a sentence of life in prison "will be a more severe punishment." The verdict form will list how many jurors agreed with each mitigator, and it provides space for jurors to write in mitigators of their own.

After balancing all of the aggravators against all the mitigators, the jury will arrive at a sentence.


I hope that I'm wrong, but I think the jury is looking for a way to avoid giving Moussaoui the death penalty.

Cubed © said...

"But because of their own faith, the Moslems will not change their mind about fighting against us.
Did you ever think of that?"

I think of it lots and lots, AA, and that's the very reason that even if 99% of Muslims compartmentalized their religion, retaining only those features that encouraged them to live productively with the "Others" and rejecting the rest, there would still be a problem.

How many active terrorists are there today, people who are driven to destroy the "Others"? Does the number equal 1% of all Muslims? The answer varies, depending on whose figures you accept for the total number of Muslims in the world, but the fact remains, that if 1% of Muslims engaged in acts of terror, we would still be looking over our shoulders all the time.

The problem is that while many religions exhort their members to multiply and to spread the word etc., I have yet to see one that has, as an absolute religious requirement, as the "standard of the good" of its moral code, the exhortation to convert the rest of the planet by any means necessary, including mayhem and murder.

It is this religious obligation, this moral commandment, that is the problem. Some portion of the membership, in every generation, will always feel obliged to carry out this moral commandment.

This is why the problem we are having will never end until and unless Islam undergoes fundamental change, and I don't think that will happen, not ever.

For the moment, Islamists believe they will succeed, given a little more time. That being the case, they will continue with business as usual.

We aren't the same people as the ones Mohammed and his Companions conquered in the glory days of Islam.

We will not tolerate this behavior forever.

Be safe, AA.

The Guy said...

AvAp you and your article point out why islam hates America so much. What is the opposite of islam? Islam means submission; slaves of Allah, if you will.

What is America? Our watchword, our symbol, the beacon that burns from every window? That which fires your hopes and gives you (and all of us) the strength to resist the encroaching dark?

Freedom.

Good luck AA and may whatever power controls this world see you safe and each day a step closer to your goal.