By Jamie Glazov

FrontPageMagazine.com | 3/12/2009 Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Bill Warner, the director of the Center for the Study of Political Islam(CSPI).

FP: Bill Warner, welcome to Frontpage Interview.

Warner: Thank you, Jamie, and Frontpage Magazine for having me.

FP: I would like to talk to you today about your view that the end ofcritical thought has arrived. First let me ask you, what exactly do you mean by critical thought?

Warner: Critical thought also can be called analytic thoughtor scientific analysis. A key element is that all sides of an idea areto be analyzed. There are no forbidden questions in critical thought.There is an appeal to logic and reason. Critical thought is not aboutfeelings, but freedom of ideas.

Critical thought is the opposite of authoritative thought that isdelivered fully developed by an “authority.” Authoritative thought isthe use of power by controlling thought and ideas. Medievalscholasticism and Communist propaganda are examples of authoritativethought where there is no room in the public forum to disagree with theauthority and if you do, you will be punished in some way.Authoritarian thought is the thought process of slavery. Freedom ofthought is not allowed.

Two characteristics of critical reasoning are skepticism and humor.Skepticism means that all assumptions can be questioned. Everything ison the table. It may seem odd to have humor as part of criticalthinking, but humor comes about as part of skepticism. Skepticismencourages humor because you are able to poke fun at any idea. Onereason for the Mohammed cartoon riots was that Islam does not allow anyskepticism or critical thought. There are no known Mohammed jokes inthe Muslim world. We have jokes about God, Jesus, St. Peter, Moses,Satan and Adam. We can make a little joke at anybody’s expense becausewe can have freedom of thought. Humor stops at Mohammed’s door, becausecritical thought stops at Mohammed’s door.

FP: Why is critical thought being abandoned?

Warner: It stands in the way of the power of what I call(with a hat tip to George Orwell) the Newstate. We now live in a worldthat has brought together the government, universities and the mediainto one political system. The Newstate power determines what will betaught in schools, put into the news, and what can be discussed atforums and meetings. For instance, the Newstate prohibits our militaryfrom studying Islamic war doctrine. The State Department can only usestandard political science methods to discuss Middle East and Asianpolicy.

The Newstate prohibits the study of political Islam in the Universities. The role of Islam in the history of slavery, the dhimmi (unbelievers living under Islamic rule) history, and the annihilation of kafir(unbeliever) civilizations is forbidden. The curriculum of theUniversities only includes small samples from the Koran, the Sira(Mohammed’s biography) and the Hadith (his traditions). You can get adegree in Middle East Studies without ever reading the texts of thecore doctrine of Islam.

At the Rotary Club or the universities, you can have a speaker who presents dawahor Islamic missionary propaganda, but no one can present a criticalanalysis of Islam. Any rational/critical/analytic study of theirideology is not given room at the table. Those who know about Islam arecalled bigots if they try to speak from knowledge. Only Muslims andthose who are ignorant about Islam (the dhimmis) are allowed to speak.Ignorance has become the only acceptable point-of-view.

The next goal of the Newstate will be to declare critical thought tobe hate-speech. Islam cannot sustain critical examination, so criticalthought will be made immoral and evil by our dhimmi Newstate.

FP: Why is critical thought so vital in the study of Islam?

Warner: Up until 9/11, almost all thought in the Universitiessaw things from the viewpoint of Islam, not from the viewpoint ofkafirs. Around 270 million people have died in jihad over the last 1400years. Yet, according to the universities, Islam just expanded, therewas no suffering. That is the Islamic view, not the kafir view.Mohammed laughed when kafir heads were thrown at his feet, but nouniversity professor calls it barbaric.

On 9/11 our universities, who are supposed to be bastions ofcritical thought, were found to be dishing out Islamic propaganda forour culture, instead of facts. Our leaders—political, religious, andcultural—had all been educated about Islam. What did they learn? Islamwas one of the great religions; the Islamic Golden Age was the highpoint of history and preserved European culture; the Crusades were anexercise in ignorance and bigotry, blah, blah… That was the universitypropaganda that had infected our civilization. We were blindsided byour own scholars.

The intellectual vacuum created a new breed of scholars—Bat Ye’or,Andrew Bostom, Robert Spencer, Serge Trifkovic, and a host of otherswho were not trained about Islam in college, but who used criticalanalysis to tackle the most pressing questions of the day: What isIslam? What does it mean to kafirs? This is the most important questionto ask.

FP: Why is the kafir viewpoint so important?

Warner: The only thing that matters to the kafir about Islamis how it treats the kafir. What does it matter to a kafir if a Muslimtries to use the bathroom following the way of Mohammed? What do I carehow a Muslim prays? Prayer and bathrooms do not concern me. I careabout how Mohammed treated kafirs and that was horrible, terrible andthe perfect example of how Muslims are to treat kafirs. Notice thatthis view is in contrast to how a Muslim sees Mohammed—that is theMuslim-centric view. They are never the same view.

The post-9/11 scholars viewed Islam from the standpoint of thevictims—the kafirs and the dhimmis. The new scholars used criticalthinking to define a new viewpoint of Islam—kafir-centric.

The answers from kafir-centric scholars about Islam all agree onwhat Islam and its history is. The kafir-centric thinkers agree as towhat the current political situation means. This is remarkable. Notethat they do not agree on what to do about it, but they all agree onthe nature of the problem and not one of them agrees with theuniversity/media/government, the Newstate, position on Islam.

Every critical thinker reaches the same conclusions. Why should thisbe a surprise? The very essence of critical thinking is beingobjective. The result does not depend upon the person. It is not anopinion, but an exercise in logic. Any person who performs theexperiments can prove the truth or falseness of, say, Newton’s laws ofmotion.

It is the same with Islam. Anyone can start with the Koran, the Sira(the life of Mohammed) and the Hadith (his traditions) and they willarrive at the same conclusions as long as they use logic and analysis.Part of the analysis is whether you analyze the doctrine from thestandpoint of a Muslim or a kafir. For instance, on the day thatMohammed killed 800 Jews in Medina it was a good thing from thestandpoint of a believer, but a terrible day for the kafir Jews. Goodfrom one point of view, but very bad from a kafir point of view.

There is a third view of Islamic scholarship—the dhimmi view.Dhimmis are kafirs that serve Islam. Dhimmis write about the doctrineof Islam just like the Muslims, but without the devotional overtones.The Newstate holds the dhimmi-centric view and wants to outlaw thekafir-centric school of thought.

FP: Why do you think they want to outlaw the kafir-centric school of thought?

Warner: Kafir-centric scholars can kick anybody’s butt in anyargument or discussion about Islam. We are atop a mountain of facts andunderstand the mind of Islam. We can answer all of the questions withauthority. We hold the high moral ground and yet, we are called bigotsfor our knowledge and labors. We are denied a forum in the public. Onlythe voice of the authority of the Newstate can speak about Islam.

Notice that when someone who is from the Newstate speaks, they neveractual talk about any facts about Islam. Or if they do quote some fact,like George Bush with his half of a Koran verse, or Obama with hisGolden Rule spin on one hadith, it is no more than a sentence theyparse out of the doctrine.

Since the kafir-centric thinkers can overpower any of the dronesfrom the Newstate, the main goal of the Newstate is to see that we donot get a forum. We are never invited to the party at the universitywhen a dhimmi or Muslim speaks. If there is a multicultural “dialogue”we are never allowed to ask difficult questions. Our voices are notheard in the State department, the Pentagon or FBI. During Mumbai, wewere never given any airtime. Face-time with anygovernment/media/university official will not happen, because it cannothappen. At all times the Newstate tries to keep a Muslim brotherhoodtype around to be a Praetorian guard if they suspect anyone whoactually knows Islam might show up.

When the Center for the Study of Political Islam was started, thebasic assumption was that once the doctrine of political Islam was laidout in a clear language, kafirs would flock to it. But most of thepopulation is filled with the Newstate platitudes and talks aboutmoderate Muslims, etc. They are desperately ignorant and refuse toengage logical analysis.

I have seen religious leaders grow angry at a lecture about whatMohammed did to other religions. They were desperate not to know, andthey remained arrogantly ignorant. So they will tell others about Islambased upon their ignorance. Ignorance is an acceptable point-of-viewabout Islam. Any dhimmi or Muslim can get a forum at any time;kafir-centric scholars are condemned as bigots and troublemakers anddenied a place at the table.

FP: How are the Kafirs doing in the ideological battle?

Warner: We have to face the facts. Kafirs are losing on everyfront. We now live in a Christian-Muslim nation according to ourcommander-in-chief-dhimmi. Priests, professors, preachers, politicians,pundits and rabbis all line up in obedience to Mohammed. If placedanywhere near the doctrinal/historical facts about political Islam,they grow tense and tell you about the “nice Muslim” they have met. Itseems as though every city has a “nice Muslim” that is passed fromdhimmi leader to dhimmi leader, so they can all say they know one.

Actual knowledge about the true history and doctrine of politicalIslam is not only nil, but the desire to know more is nonexistent.Responses about Islam are denials about what Islam is and what it does.Liberal preachers and rabbis, for instance, are political Islam’ssupporters and mouth tales about how well Islam and Judaism co-existedin the Middle Ages and how Jews and Muslims were fellow scholars. Theyrefuse to engage in any sort of rational/critical/analytic discussionabout Islam. The rest have different excuses, but they remain in thedhimmi camp.

Critical thinking is being abandoned as fast as Klan robes at anACLU meeting. One thing is very clear—the enemy is no longer politicalIslam. The enemy of critical thought is the dhimmi. It is the dhimmiswho carry water for Islam and do great damage to our civilization.

FP: Why are the dhimmis desperate not to know about Islam?

Warner: Money is the motivation of one set of dhimmis—theprofessors. Islam pours a great deal of money into the universitysystem. It is very easy to purchase a professor and a department.Everything from building funds, professorships, trips, and grantspurchase the loyalty of dhimmi universities. You don’t bite the handthat feeds you. We must also include the dhimmi political types beingbribed by the Saudis.

The other answer is laziness and fear, with fear in the lead.Everyone starts off at less than zero. The universities taught us thatIslam was good, Golden Age, yada, yada or at worst—benign. The Newstateloves Islam just like they love illegal immigrants. Just watch CNN,read the NY Times and listen to the President. Islamic life is good,and where it is not good, it is our fault—colonialism and Bush. So ifyou float downstream, why would you want to learn anything?

The Newstate making the learning process difficult also helpslaziness. Islam deliberately made the Koran, the Sira and the Hadithhard to understand and the professors went along with the Islam-is-hardpropaganda. The Koran is notorious for never being read, much lessunderstood. Why? The universities did not want to make it simple.

But we come to the big one—fear. Everyone has a clue that Islam’sdualistic nature contains unlimited violence, but that clue remains inthe background. Saying you are afraid of Islam is like a white womansaying she is afraid of black males. Expressing your fear is proof ofyour racism and bigotry.

There is a larger fear—what if the boogieman really is underneaththe bed? What will we do? People are desperately ignorant. Otherwiseintelligent people believe the most contradictory things, but wind upwith—Islam must be good, it just has to be good, because if it is notgood, I cannot imagine what we will do. There is fear. Desperate fear.

What if the preacher or rabbi who attended the interfaith dialogsfinds out that the imam was a liar? His congregation does not want tohear it. What if the politician finds out about the true nature ofIslam? The media and the Moslem voters rule him. The media is sointellectually corrupt that they are past discussion.

If you don’t know, you don’t have to deal with it. Ignorance isgood. All the leaders are ignorant, they are rich and powerful, and sothey must be right. Turn off your mind and float downstream. Dhimmisare floaters.

FP: How can we educate these dhimmis and change their point of view?

Warner: It turns out that there is one aspect of Islam thateven dhimmis will pay attention to—the history of the victim, inparticular, their own victims. Our Tears of Jihad project teaches about just that—the history of the victims of jihad.

Based upon victim history, we have created a new idea innewsletters. The idea is not to present any facts about Islam. Factsabout Islam produce panic, denial and fear. We decided to present thesuffering of a group without the doctrine that causes it. Our goal isto show religious leadership and individuals what suffering is visitedupon their group.

The first one of these was the Bulletin of Jew Hatred (the term “Jew hatred” comes from Bostom’s wonderful Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism). We have added the Bulletin of Christian Persecution and the Bulletin of the Oppression of Women. The Bulletin of Cultural Annihilation and the Bulletin of Asian Annihilationare in the works. The Bulletins give a summary with a link to theoriginal article. We only report actual events, not blogs, editorialsor comments. The Bulletin has the motto: Facts without comments—wecollect the dots; you connect them.

Each Bulletin gives a very short summary of each of the actualevents—who, what, when, where, but no why. The no “why” makes it easyfor everybody to read, even the left, since all comments that relate tothe actual doctrine or history of political Islam are called right wingor conservative. It is peculiar, but to have knowledge about the actualdoctrine and history of political Islam is being conservative. Thatleaves ignorance to be the official policy of theprogressives/liberals/left. Knowledge is considered to be the basis ofbigotry, ignorance is considered to be virtue, according to the ethicsof the Newstate.

The Bulletins come out weekly. It is like a drumbeat—each week theevents roll on and the steady stream of news tells another story thatis not told by the Newstate media.

FP: How has the Bulletin of Jew Hatred been received?

Warner: I have been told by one of the first readers of JewHatred that she thought herself to be well informed, but every event inthe Bulletin was new to her. A reader of the Christian Bulletin saidthat he never knew that this was happening to Christians. This is thestory that the Newstate refuses to tell. It is the story you have todecide not to see and not to report.

We are finding that people are receptive. Since we don’t have anycomments, this means that they can’t throw up the barrier of partisanpolitics or those comments are bigoted opinions. A liberal rabbi saidthat he liked the no comment, just the facts.

So, we have created a stealth weapon that flies under the PC,multicultural radar. But in designing it, we realized that criticalanalysis was not a good general approach. People don’t want to hearanything bad about Islam, but they will examine their own battlecausalities.

The key word is here is their “own.” This is the reason we have aBulletin for every group. Hopefully, this idea will educate andilluminate the problem with political Islam. If you are interested inour newsletter or Bulletins, go to politicalislam.com and sign up.

I’d like to take this time if I could to make a pitch for help. We are looking for an editor for the Hindu bulletin.

We need bird dogs, people who can help get the Bulletins to relevantorganizations and groups. Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, women,intellectuals, artists, pagans, gays, free people everywhere—thebulletins document your suffering on a weekly basis. Help us educategroups that directly influence these people.

If you want to participate in any way with the Bulletins, please email me at: bw@politicalislam.com.

FP: Bill Warner, thank you for joining us.

Warner: Thank you Jamie for this opportunity to speak to your readers.