I think this is unfair Bill.
Qutb is saying that it is not intellectually honest nor is it faithful to true belief to suddenly discover, as the apologists would like to, that the Islamic doctrine of jihaad is actually completely consistent with defensive war as understood in post World War II International Law.
He is affirming that jihaad is something else -- it has its own textual sources in revelation, its own historical background, and a scholarship surrounding it that has been developed over hundreds of years, it even has its own disagreements among its scholars.
For all that, it would be basically impossible to find any Islamic scholar in the first millenium of Islamic thought who argued that Jihaad means 'defensive war' only.
Your argument that to say that Islaamic rule is just and guarantees freedom of belief is somehow an Orwellian statement is just that -- your argument. I disagree. I find Bush's statements much more Orwellian in nature. I guess that shows our difference in worldview and understanding of history.
"once there is a single (mine) Deen of al-Islam, then there will be no compulsion in religion."
I snorted (Diet Lime) Coke over my laptop when i read that. I have to admit it makes sense, logically speaking.