What’s the difference between a Christian militia and an Islamic jihadist group? Obviously this is more than one word, but you get the drift. I realize this subject is going to get me on the very thin edge of what is politically correct, but I’ve just gotta take that risk. Perhaps the way to broach this subject is to do a shallow dive (I promise) into the now infamous Crusaders. I know that many of you have probably forgotten (or never knew) your Crusader history, so let me refresh you.
Between the 11th and 13th centuries, nine separate Crusades were carried out primarily by super pious Franks under the franchise of the Holy Roman Empire, seeking remission of all sin and immediate entry into the kingdom of heaven by dying in an effort to repatriate all the “Holy Lands” to Christian control. Yes, I know this sounds a little quirky, but facts are facts no matter how you dress them up. And they were quite good at stirring things up in the hinterlands, but never quite grasped the golden ring by “liberating” Jerusalem. Hmm. I thinks there’s still a pretty big fuss over that particular piece of real estate.
In any case, the Crusader’s practice was as follows. Pick a city controlled and populated by the heathen Muslim infidels, lay siege to the target city, defeat the defenses of the weakened city, massacre all the inhabitants, destroy all the mosques, and pillage the city. I don’t know what all is involved in pillaging, but it doesn’t sound good. Perhaps a bit excessive, but effective. Then sooner or later they got tired or started to miss the warm embrace of the missus and went home. If they were lucky and got killed in during the Crusade, the religious bigwigs had already granted them indulgences for their sins and their soul would head straight to the pearly gates. If they lived, their past sins were forgiven, but they would have to own up for their future sins. There were no dancing virgins involved in any of this. Sound familiar?
Okay, why do I bring all this up? For two reasons. First, the Crusaders thought they were pretty much on the high road, doing God’s work so to speak. The Crusadees, on the other hand, pretty much thought of them as Christian terrorists and wished fervently that they would go away and mind their own business. Second, while there’s not a straight line between the Crusaders of the 12th century and the Hutaree Christian militia of the 21st century, there is a least one profound similarity (and btw, I believe it’s shared by the Islamic jihadists as well) – they all suffer from really serious self delusion. They make their own reality without respect to what’s really real, true and right. And they act on that belief in ways that are seriously harmful to those around them and the world in general.
I’m certainly no Islamophile, but then again, I’m not Christian apologist either. But my understanding (enhanced by Wikipedia) is that jihad at it’s highest level refers to the personal struggle to achieve inner peace. Notwithstanding this benevolent definition, we now see that it’s more or less been co-opted by extremists to try for religious sanction for their evil deeds. Likewise, the term militia is an honorable word, even sanctioned in our constitution, which refers to a military force of ordinary citizens who seek to provide for the defense of our fellow citizens and the common good. It too has been hijacked by extremists and conjoined with the word Christian to try for religious sanction. And the troubling thing is that it’s working…..in both cases.
Here’s a puzzler for you. What do you think we should do and what word should we use if we discover a group plotting to kill US law enforcement agents and use weapons of mass destruction to achieve civil unrest? Would terrorist be too strong? How ‘bout a little waterboarding to get all the skinny on their fellow travelers; deny them legal representation for long periods; electronically eavesdrop on their family, friends, and associates; send them off to a dungeon in Poland for the winter; then try them in a military tribunal while ignoring the rules of law. Sounds about right to me. Whaddya think? Hell, I’d go all the way and make them have dinner every night for a week with Dick Cheney and throw in Liz to boot. What’s sauce for the goose…….
What we call someone doesn’t make them what they are, but it matters. An Islamic jihadist is still a terrorist if he tries to achieve his political or religious objectives using terror and violence as a weapon. A Christian militia group who tries to achieve political or religious objectives by using illegal violence and terror is a terrorist as well.
Let’s call them what they are; not what they want us to think they are. A terrorist by any other name is still a terrorist.
