Semantics: What Muslims Mean By ‘Defensive Jihad’
Throughout history Muslims have justified and rationalised every single act of Islamic murder and violence as ‘defensive’. Indeed Muslims, not long after the death of Muhammad, conquered almost one third of the world defensively. Think of Hamas blowing up infant schools in Israel defensively because all Israeli children end up in the IDF or of the defence that was 9/11. In addition, people must also remember that Hitler invaded both Czechoslovakia and Poland supposedly for defensive reasons. Indeed virtually all acts of aggression in history have been done with the words defence coming out of the mouths of the aggressor.
The fits into the general situation in which Muslims use a whole host of words in ways diametrically opposed to how they are usually used in the West. For example, words like peace, justice, truth, rights and so . We should also think in terms of Islamic defence. And so too with Islamic rights, Islamic truth, Islamic peace, Islamic justice, etc.
All this has something to do with what Muhammad says in the early parts of the Koran when he was lying about Islamic peace and Islamic interfaith (to use a contemporary word) because he knew that he was weak at the time and therefore he needed to pacify his many stronger enemies. (These peaceful passages were all abrogated by Muslims anyway; and substituted with more warlike and violent ones.) And because Muhammad used the word defence (or the words defensive war) earlier, Muslims , though certainly not all of them, have ever since felt the need to justify their violence and killings in terms of defence. It really is silly and just an example of Muslims going through the motions in their attempt to convince the kuffar that they are not into war for its own sake or, more truthfully and importantly, that they are not attempting toconquer the entire world for Allah.
There have been well over 30,00 fatal jihadist attacks since 2001 – almost every single one of them will have been classed as defensive by the Muslims who carried them out an also by their many defenders and apologists here in the West. This, again, falls into the pattern in hich Noam Chomsky called 9/11 defensive and indeed he does the same about all terrorist outrages both here in the West and even in Muslim countries. In each case, because Muslims are simply children to these racist Leftists, they have no free will or conscience thus each and every time they do something terrible, it is always a case of the Devil made them do it. That Devil is usually capitalism, racism, Islamophobia, past colonialism, present imperialism… anything which takes responsibility away from Muslim children and places it in the laps of white, Western adults.
Even Islamic rape is often deemed to be defensive to many Muslims. Burning down churches is defensive. Confiscating and burning Bibles is defensive. Every act of violence and killing of non-Muslims by Muslims is by Islamic definition defensive to Muslims.
So treat the Islamic word defence semantically (as being without the same meaning in the West – not that Westerners agree on all meanings), just as you should do with Islamic peace, truth, justice, etc. In all cases, Islamic concepts are often the exact inversion of their Western equivalents. Racist Leftists and Left-Liberals should see this and therefore realise that Muslims-as-Muslims often truly are examples of the Other they otherwise wax so lyrically about. They should stop thinking that all Muslims are just like their dinner-party chums in Islington or wherever (who just happen to also have brown skin); that is when they are not treating foreign Muslims as exotics or children.