Michele Bachmann's Obsessions With the Caliphate
There's quite a few dumb quotes by Michele Bachmann that have gathered up over the years, but last night's is not likely to gain attention, given how few Americans understand the Shi'a-Sunni divide. So I'll raise it. Here it is, in response to Ron Paul's concern of overreaction and invasion of Iran:
The clause to which she refers is in the quite lengthy preamble to the Constitution, which does refer to the creation of an army to fulfill the "ideological mission of jihad", though it also references Qur'anic verse which relates to violence and it is an army after all, making it seem odd to make the matter of jihad ideological in that context. I'd describe the section as deeply disconcerting, but not "unequivocal". In fact if anything it's deliberately equivocal. "Ideological" jihad by an army is better described as potentially dishonest dissembling rather than unequivocal. No caliphate though.
So at long last, I ask, again, if we're going to have candidates for President advocating invading another Muslim country, can't we ask that they at least figure out, once and for all, the basic, core differences between Shi'i and Sunni. They're really not that hard.
HAH
Look no further than the Iranian constitution, which states unequivocally that their mission is to extend jihad across the world and eventually to set up a worldwide caliphate.Right, Michele, right. Because if you think about it, what else could a Shi'a state want to do than resurrect the greatest Shi'a killing institution in world history, namely the caliphate? In the Shi'i community, "caliph" comes in right around "contract killer" and "mafia boss" in terms of respected professions. Umayyads, Abbasids, Ottomans, Mua'wiya ibn Abi Sufyan forward, we hate them almost without exception. You might as well accuse some militant Protestant regime of being in league with Rome.
The clause to which she refers is in the quite lengthy preamble to the Constitution, which does refer to the creation of an army to fulfill the "ideological mission of jihad", though it also references Qur'anic verse which relates to violence and it is an army after all, making it seem odd to make the matter of jihad ideological in that context. I'd describe the section as deeply disconcerting, but not "unequivocal". In fact if anything it's deliberately equivocal. "Ideological" jihad by an army is better described as potentially dishonest dissembling rather than unequivocal. No caliphate though.
So at long last, I ask, again, if we're going to have candidates for President advocating invading another Muslim country, can't we ask that they at least figure out, once and for all, the basic, core differences between Shi'i and Sunni. They're really not that hard.
HAH
Comments