A Saudi columnist says the violent jihad movement of Islam is similar to, or even worse than, Nazism, and that for the West not to oppose it will lead to consequences worse than Nazi Germany.

Here are excerpts of two columns in the Saudi daily Al-Jazirah, by columnist Muhammad bin ‘Abd Al-Latif Aal Al-Sheikh, as translated by the Middle East Media Research Institute, or MEMRI:

I am one of those who believe strongly that our clerics, students and preachers shoulder most of the responsibility for the war against terrorism, especially since terrorism today exploits religion under the pretext of “Allah said” and “The Prophet said.” Thus, after these [terrorists] have sullied [Islam] with blood and tarnished its name through violence, killing, explosions, and destruction, it is the obligation of clerics and everyone involved in da’wa [propagating for Islam], before anyone else, first to defend the religion, and after that to defend peaceful people, from among the Muslims and others.

The question that must be asked courageously is: Have the clerics of our times fulfilled their duty, as our forefathers did when they [fought] against the Khawarij? The most direct answer is: Sadly, no! Let’s assume that the government decides to allow women to drive without obligating them, for instance, to wear a veil; what would be the reaction of these clerics and students? How many protest delegations would come to Riyadh from all the provinces? How many fatwas would be signed? How many accusations would be leveled? How many noisy sermons would be delivered by many imams in the mosques? …

Is a woman driving a car, or even not wearing a veil, a more serious prohibition in Allah’s eyes … than the acts of murder, slaughter, destruction and violation of women’s honor [committed] by these “sick people”? Why in the name of God [do we show] all this gentleness, forgiveness and a tendency to “speak gently” when it comes to terrorists, while [we show] extreme blatancy and harshness when it comes to women, for instance? …

In 1945, a short time after Nazi Germany’s surrender, a conference was held in Potsdam, Germany, in which one of the important articles [adopted] was “denazification.” This conference is credited with uprooting the culture of Nazism from Europe. [The conference] aroused the world’s conscience against Nazism with the end of World War II, firmed up the revulsion toward it, and made it into something similar to a crime – not just in judicial and political terms, but also in terms of culture, ideology and especially the media. Thus, it suffices in Europe nowadays to accuse a politician of having Nazi tendencies, or of inciting to Nazism, for him to turn into something of a bandit. The [Potsdam] Agreement was signed by Britain, the U.S.S.R., the U.S. and China – the important world superpowers at that time.

Why shouldn’t we learn a lesson [of the Potsdam] experience, which had the greatest impact on the uprooting of Nazism from the world? … Imagine that the way of dealing with statements by Al-Salafiyya Al-Jihadiyya … was comparable to the West’s way of dealing with Nazism. [Editor’s note: “Al-Salafiyya Al-Jihadiyya” is a term used by Islamist terror groups to describe themselves as continuing in the footsteps of the early believers of the Prophet Muhammad’s generation, and as believing in the duty to wage a modern Jihad war against infidels.] Would a [TV] channel, like al-Jazeera, for example, dare to spread this ideology and to relate to statements by its leaders and preachers in the spirit of “point/counterpoint” and “freedom of speech”? Everybody knows that this channel in particular has had the greatest media impact on the shaping, spreading and strengthening of this dangerous trend, and that it provides it with wide space to express its “acts of heroism,” its statements and its videotaped operations, to the point where it [al-Jazeera] has become the primary platform of [Al-Salafiyya Al-Jihadiyya], as is happening today in Iraq.

Therefore, I still believe that one of the primary missions of the international community today is to repeat its experience with Nazism and to deal with this dangerous barbarian culture exactly as it dealt with the Nazi culture. If this does not happen, the near future is liable to bring many [events], the consequences of which will be far more severe for all of humanity than [the consequences] of World War II.

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.