Words of Destruction

Words of Destruction

One of the foundations of a democratic and free society is an atmosphere that encourages people to speak freely. A society that intimidates dissident voices into silence can never be a free society.

It has been argued that the right to free speech is not the right to kill people with words. Shouting “fire” in a crowded theater will cause a stampede and people will die. Words that kill cannot be allowed in a society that respects human life.

There is another way in which words can kill. If there is a fire in a crowded theater and someone tells the frightened crowd that they should ignore the fire alarms, that they have nothing to fear and that they should stay in their seats and continue to enjoy the show. The person who falsely tranquilizes the crowd is burning those people to death with his words. Calming the crowd in such a situation is an act of murder.

The Western world is the crowded theater of our parable and radical Islam is the fire that threatens to burn the theater with all the people inside it. There are people who risk their lives to inform the Western world of the danger that they face but the vast majority of the media outlets are engaged in an opposite effort. The mainstream media seeks to downplay the ideology of terrorists and make it appear that acts of murder are politically motivated or that they are acts of deranged individuals.

The ideology of radical Islam which encourages the killing of innocent civilians is evil and deserves no respect. Those people who are in the crosshairs of radical Islam’s anger have the right to be warned and informed. Those who are raising the alarm and spreading the truth about this evil ideology are serving the people of Western civilization. While those who attempt to disassociate the declared ideology of the terrorists from the acts of terror are aiding and abetting radical Islam in its murderous quest for world domination.

The various personalities of the mainstream media do not see themselves as tools in the hands of murderers. They see themselves as noble individuals who stand for political correctness. These men and women do not want to offend the feeling of moderate Muslims who do not share in the brutal fanaticism of the radical Islamists.

As noble as these sentiments are they still do not justify the act of blinding the Western world to the danger that it faces. Falsely pacifying the potential victims of radical Islam is murder, violating the norms of political correctness and offending the feelings of peaceful people are not relevant factors in this equation. These journalists are like people who silence the fire-alarms in a burning building because someone may needlessly be awakened from their innocent sleep.

The greatest threat facing Western civilization is the threat of radical Islam. The people of the Western world need to be able to speak openly about this threat to their very existence. Those people who attempt to impose limits on this conversation are committing murder with their words.

If you found this article helpful please consider making a donation to Judaism Resources by clicking on the link below.


Judaism Resources is a recognized 501(c) 3 public charity and your donation is tax exempt.

Thank You

Yisroel C. Blumenthal

This entry was posted in General. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Words of Destruction

  1. tildeb says:

    The term ‘radical Islam’ doesn’t really help to identify the actual problem but lumps a fairly complex assortment of four important considerations – (often genuine) grievances, an identity crisis, charismatic recruiters, and ideological dogma – with a very real problem of violent jihadism and Islamism… supported by a variable proportion of people found in any Muslim community. In other words, I don’t think there is any such thing as ‘radical’ Islam and I do not think anyone who carries out violent jihad or supports political Islam is some fringe element of the faith. A third of British born, British raised, university graduate, middle class Muslims agree that killing indefence of the faith is justifiable. That’s not fringe. That’s mainstream.

    I see the addressing of this problem as itself a significant problem with real and often fatal consequences for real people in real life, not least of whom are moderating reformers within Islam itself… the very people the West should be supporting. What I find gaining traction here in the West is the idea of going along with the charade of some Islamist group identity (as if this shows tolerance and respect) while abandoning the very voices – often individual voices – necessary for moderation… the very voices that want to move away from violent jihad and political support for Islamism (instituting some version of sharia) and towards secular states who understand that this move is only possible by instituting what we in the West take for granted, namely, legal respect and protection for individual autonomy. Without autonomy defended by law and supported by the military, moderation is doomed… which is exactly what we have seen evolve from the Arab Spring. Without autonomy, equality and respect and secular government is a pipe dream.

    This Western problem that exacerbates addressing the real concerns about violent jihadism and Islamism is supported by those I call ‘illiberal liberals’, what thoughtful people in the West call ‘regressive leftists’. These ‘politically correct’ supporters are reverse racists but don’t realize it: they think they support Muslims by empowering group identity and end up walking hand-in-hand with the jihadists and Islamist leaders. These illiberal liberals offer not only faux-sympathy and tolerance for those who would take their autonomy away in a heartbeat, but who then use the press and positions of public engagement to vilify and smear and ban and convict anyone who dares to criticize the very real source of the problem of violent jihad and creeping Islamism – believing the Koran is the perfect word of god – into the political and legal arena.

    This is when we encounter the term ‘Islamophobe’ for those who point out the antithetical nature against individual autonomy such allegiance produces, who point out the very real danger to our civil liberties and human rights. In return, such warning voices are represented to be the REAL problem and dealt with by smears of being label as intolerant, a bigot, a racist, and so on. Yet the source of people to be violent jihadists here in the West as it is throughout the world: muslim communities. It is from this poplation that regularly supplies violent jihadists and Islamists. What we end up with is a public domain where we can’t even talk about this supply source and what compels people to become violent in the name of Islam and can only tsk tsk places that regularly exercise legal brutality and barbarism and often death against Muslims brave enough to speak out to change and modernize their faith.

  2. Dina says:

    The liberal media have blood on their hands.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.