On another post today, a short discussion took place about how muslims reinvent the word ‘defend’ as a rhetorical trick to justify out-and-out attacking people, arguing that it is defending the religion, to use force to make islam and sharia law the supreme organizing principle over non-muslims.
Please read this article about the pending implementation of sharia in another state within Malaysia and notice how the logic of the advocates is similar, if adjusted to the circumstances. One example:
Abdullah was responding to the stand of non-Muslims in Kelantan who are opposing the implementation of hudud in the PAS-governed state.
He said non-Muslims should not be so greedy to the point that they want to interfere with the exclusive rights and interests of the Malays and Bumiputera, who are the original inhabitants of the country.
Non-Muslims, he argues, are being greedy by expecting the continued (nearly) equal rights under the law when they should expect to be dhimmis as it is ‘rightfully’ an Islamic nation. Of course to muslims, “the whole world is a mosque” so there is a rational for the conquest and forcing of Islamic supremacy and sharia world-wide.
The logic is very similar to classic islamic logic which justifies attacking autonomous non-muslims in order to force sharia and islamic supremacy on all.