(Page 2 of 3)
He writes that Belloc said:
"It did, as has been so frequently repeated, destroy at once what it came across; it did exterminate all those who would not accept Islam..."
The actual quote is:
"It did NOT, as has been so frequently repeated, destroy at once what it came across; it did NOT exterminate all those who would not accept Islam..."
Belloc's point was that Muslims, far from wiping out the culture they conquered, in fact made major borrowings from that culture. He then goes on to say that, contrary to the opinion of some people, this wasn't because they were "tolerant" but because they were initially few and disorganized. (The entire Belloc article can be found here.)
As far as the actual substance of the article, I partially agree, but I hasten to reassure Mr. Neumayr that the left is, in fact, not in the least motivated by a love of Islam. Rather, they are motivated by the desire to massacre unborn infants and a blinding hatred towards anyone who might stand in their way. ...
The basic intra-left controversy, in which both sides take for granted that the real enemy is serious Christianity, is whether to blame Christians for being anti-Muslim bigots, or to jump on the anti-Muslim bandwagon themselves and labor mightily to establish as the conventional wisdom that all "fundamentalists" are alike and that, therefore, any pro-lifer is morally equivalent to the Taliban.
The first side would be your average politically correct
leftoid, second side would be people like Andrew Sullivan and
Christopher Hitchens. I figure it is probably better for the
country, in the short term, if they adopt the second strategy.
Anybody whose opinion of Christianity changes as a result of such
horse waste probably is already anti-Christian, so it won't hurt
Christians, and if it does, we can handle it. So, if the left
thinks 1) that by getting behind the war effort they can hurt
Christians, and 2) that they themselves, or anybody they know,
won't have to, you know, like, actually fight themselves
or anything, then the left might actually shut up and let us fight
the war we have to fight, which would be a major improvement over
their usual behavior and would spare everyone a lot of
headaches.
-- Roy Koczela
Your article on Islam and its followers was gratefully received by those of us who have wearied of persons in high places referring to it as a "religion of peace." I really thought Jerry Falwell would hold up to his own understanding of the nature of Islam but he caved. You are a man of courage and I thank you for your willingness to speak the truth. I would say to expect a Fatwah shortly, but this is the first time I have read The American Prowler or any of your articles and wonder if the "evil eye" might pass by your words as well.
On the other hand, with NRO's Rod Dreher
sending people your way, you just may be found out and make the
most wanted list in Iran, or maybe even here, as I believe we are
far more plagued by these fanatics in this country than we are
being told. By the way, I am adding you to my regular reading list,
but I can't send money. Sorry. I need a job first, as my husband
does not fund my political interests.
-- C. Seymour
Your Falwell column is on-target.
-- Irene Groot
San Jose, CA
NOTHING DOING
Re: Jackie Mason & Raoul Felder's Doing
Nothing:
In response to your article "Doing Nothing" a few points with regards to the U.S. Army Air Force and Churchill's recommendation to FDR to bomb the death camps are in order.
The U.S. Army Air Force relied on B-17 and B-24 four-engine bombers and their highly-trained crews to fly daylight strategic bombardment missions to destroy the industrial heart of Nazi Germany. Losses were heavy. On one mission to bomb the ball-bearing factories at Schweinfurt in the summer of 1943, for example, Nazi fighters and antiaircraft artillery shot down over sixty bombers, one-third of attacking formations. A few months later, on another mission to bomb this same target, the Nazis shot down one-third of the bombers again. All missions flown over the Third Reich witnessed B-17s shot out of formations by Luftwaffe fighters or B-24s torn to pieces by 88mm Flak artillery.
The primary reason for the heavy losses of bombers and crews was the lack of a suitable long-range escort fighter to equip U.S. Army Air Force fighter squadrons in Europe. Until the P-51 Mustangs arrived in large numbers in Europe during the early months of 1944, long-range bomber penetration missions into Nazi Germany were cost prohibitive. It was not until March 1944 that the Army Air Force attacked Berlin, a deep and heavily defended target. When they did attack Berlin, a small number of new P-51s escorted the bombers to and from the target, inflicting heavy losses on Luftwaffe fighters. Even with the P-51s in attendance, however, the Luftwaffe and flak artillery shot down nearly 70 bombers, or 10 percent of the force.
Christian Louboutin Shoes| 8.27.09 @ 1:41AM
Discount Christian Louboutin shoes
Cheap Christian Louboutin Shoes