Posted on 10/05/2010 4:57:32 PM PDT by greyfoxx39
It would be nice if Western apologists for Islam and its sharia law would listen to that even if the Saudis do pay them handsomely to turn a deaf ear. We constantly hear that the true jihad is really an internal personal struggle to become a better person (although the more honest apologists concede that this is a modern, revisionist construction that would have been rejected by Islams most renowned and respected scholars). To maintain some semblance of credibility, these Islamophiles concede, through clenched teeth, that while there exists a violent interpretation of Islam, it is a relic whose only conceivable legitimate invocation is in defense i.e., when Islam is under attack. Thus, the argument goes, we neednt concern ourselves with it. Since I wrote my last book, The Grand Jihad, and participated in the recently released Team B-II study called Sharia: The Threat to America, Ive heard a good deal of criticism along the lines of Sharia doesnt really say what he claims it says, or Some scholars offer a different, moderate interpretation, etc. I humbly submit that this misses the point. I went out of my way in the book, and in the introduction to the study, to make clear that I do not presume (nor do my colleagues presume in the study) to pronounce on what the true Islam says, or on whether there even is a true Islam. Wholly apart from any jihad against the West, Muslims have been killing each other for 14 centuries, and most of the internecine warfare is over competing scriptural interpretations and claims of apostasy (a capital offense in Islam, according to the most authoritative sharia authorities). Obviously, there is plenty of internal Islamic controversy over what Islam and its law truly stand for. Americans should be very wary of people who claim to know, however well-meaning they may seem. The point is that, whether they are right or wrong, there are millions upon millions of Muslims who believe exactly what Shahzad believes about the nature of jihad and the demands of sharia. It is of no moment to them that we do not see ourselves as at war with Islam, or that we see the victims of terrorism as innocent. They see things as Shahzad sees them, even if they are not willing to go the next step of commiting acts of terrorism, as Shahzad is. From the perspective of American national security, it does not matter if those Muslims are wrong about Islam. What matters is that there are a lot of them and they constitute a mainstream current of Islamic thought. They have the support of influential Islamic scholars who tell them Islam is under siege, and they dont care in the slightest whether Western intellectuals (at whom they scoff) or Muslim reformers (whom they regard as apostates) think they have interpreted Islam incorrectly. Eventually there will be another Shahzad, a competent one. When he strikes, it wont do much for our security to hear a President, a federal judge, a Homeland Security Secretary, an Attorney General, and a bunch of academics from Harvard and Georgetown tell us that a bad extremist has perverted or hijacked the true Islam. High-minded wishful thinking about how tiny the threat to us is wont actually make it tiny. |
If you would like to be on my low volume ping list, please FReepmail me.
The first thing that happens after the next attack is feds protecting the moques and Obama making a speech praising Islam as a religion.
Rashad Hussain Reportedly Yanked From OIC Chicago Conference
I believe that it doesn't matter what the Koran states. Muslims will believe what they want and act as they wish against "infidels." It is their excuse for attacking Western civilization. The enemy is real and we should treat him so accordingly. If mainstream muslims do not agree with their brothers, then they should be doing something about it--like jailing the extremists and ending the radical extremists.
Muslims will tell you that Islam forbids suicide. In the next breath they will praise suicide bombers as "martyrs", and see no contradiction in that.
They will claim that the Koran forbids killing women and children and civilians generally. Then in the next breath they will celebrate the murder of Israeli civilians, claiming that all Israelis, including women and children, are legitimate targets.
My conclusion: "Mainstream" Islam is a totalitarian death cult which is and always has been incompatible with Western civilization and humanity, and anybody who would accept at face value any statements made by devout, practicing Muslims would have to be some kind of idiot.
I posted
The problem with Islam, is that it gives a VERY expansive definition of "under attack".
ANY mocking or ridicule of Islam is an attack (eg, the riots following the Mo Cartoons, the killing of Theo van Gogh over a movie critical of Islam, etc). ANY attempt to constrain the expansion of Islam is an attack. In the French slums, when a Muslim dies while trying to escape arrest, it triggers riots.
ANYTHING but total submission can be considered an "attack" on Islam. That is the problem.
There is no contradiction. "Suicide" is killing yourself, and only yourself. It is bad because it deprives Islam of a potential fighter, or of somebody who could support fighters, without any benefit to Islam.
Somebody who dies while attacking infidels is a martyr under Islam, not a suicide.
Muslims will believe what they want and act as they wish against “infidels.”
While some Muslims say they may not agree with the tactics; yet they agree with the goals. Because Islam has a built in failsafe; able to kill those who are apostate or disagree. Further, whatever the non-Muslim or average Muslim states, comprehends or really knows about Islam does not matter.
What does matter is, what has been taught throughout Islams history within its primary schools of Islamic teaching namely: Saudi Arabia, Iran and Pakistan!
Islam is Islam; there is NO such thing as a (division) Radical Islam versus Traditional Islam versus Passive Islam. Islam is nothing more than a military and quasi-governmental movement, disguised as a religion to control its population. The closest frame work to Islam is Communism, Nazism or Political Environmentalism; could they be considered religion.
As for the Quran, supporting documents and its teachings have not changed from original precepts. What has changed is how blind the West is willing to be, to get along with those having a primary goal to become the dominate philosophy and power at any cost.
Yes, anything but surrender—is an attack.
There is indeed a contradiction to a non-Muslim. Suicide is killing yourself, whether or not you take others with you.
I think the judge is the one who needs to read the Koran.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.