Posted on 09/18/2014 4:52:29 AM PDT by SJackson
Islamic State Atrocities the Product of Grievances?
Posted By Raymond Ibrahim On September 17, 2014 @ 12:33 am In Daily Mailer,FrontPage | 22 Comments
While many have rightfully criticized U.S. President Obamas recent assertion that the Islamic State is not Islamic, some of his other equally curious but more subtle comments pronounced in the same speech have been largely ignored.
Consider the presidents invocation of the grievances meme to explain the Islamic States success: At this moment the greatest threats come from the Middle East and North Africa, where radical groups exploit grievances for their own gain. And one of those groups is ISILwhich calls itself the Islamic State.
Obamas logic, of course, is fortified by an entire apparatus of professional apologists who make the same claim. Thus Georgetown professor John Espositowhose apologetics sometimes morph into boldfaced liesalso recently declared that The primary drivers [for the Islamic States violence] are to be found elsewhere, that is, not in Islam but in a long list of grievances.
In other words and once again, its apparently somehow our fault that Islamic State Muslims are behaving savagelycrucifying, beheading, enslaving, and massacring people only on the basis that they are infidels: thus when IS herds and slaughters infidel men (citing the example of the prophet)thats because theyre angry at something America did; when IS captures infidel women and children, and sells them on the sex-slave market (citing Islamic teachings)thats because theyre angry at something America did; when IS bombs churches, breaks their crosses, and tells Christians to convert or die (citing Islamic scriptures)thats because theyre angry at something America did.
Although the grievance meme flies in the face of logic, it became especially popular after the 9/11 al-Qaeda strikes on America. The mainstream media, following the Islamist propaganda network Al Jazeeras lead, uncritically picked up and disseminated Osama bin Ladens videotapes to the West where he claimed that al-Qaedas terror campaign was motivated by grievances against the Westgrievances that ranged from U.S. support for Israel to failure for the U.S. to sign the Kyoto Agreement concerning climate change.
Of course, that was all rubbish, and I have written more times than I care to remember about how in their internal Arabic-language communiques to fellow Muslims that never get translated to English, Osama, al-Qaeda, and virtually every Islamist organization make it a point to insist that jihad is an Islamic obligation that has nothing to do with grievances.
Consider Osamas own words in an internal letter to fellow Saudis:
Our talks with the infidel West and our conflict with them ultimately revolve around one issue one that demands our total support, with power and determination, with one voice and it is: Does Islam, or does it not, force people by the power of the sword to submit to its authority corporeally if not spiritually?
Yes. There are only three choices in Islam: [1] either willing submission [conversion]; [2] or payment of the jizya, through physical, though not spiritual, submission to the authority of Islam; [3] or the sword for it is not right to let him [an infidel] live. The matter is summed up for every person alive: Either submit, or live under the suzerainty of Islam, or die. (The Al Qaeda Reader, p. 42)
Conversion, submission, or the sword is, of course, the mission of the Islamic Statenot alleviating grievances. Yet its worse than that; for unlike al-Qaeda, the Islamic State, from day one of its existence, has made it very clearin Osamas words, with power and determination, with one voicethat its massacres, enslavements, crucifixions, and beheadings of infidels are all based on Islamic law or Sharianot silly grievances against the West. Unlike al-Qaeda, the Islamic State is confident enough to avoid the grievances/taqiyya game and forthrightly asserts its hostility for humans based on their religious identity.
Yet by slipping the word grievances to explain the Islamic States Sharia-based savageries, Obama apparently hopes America has been thoroughly conditioned like Pavlovs dog to automatically associate Islamic world violence with grievances.”
What Obama fails to understandor fails to mentionis that, yes, the Islamic State, al-Qaeda, and countless angry Muslims around the world are indeed often prompted to acts of violence by grievances. But as fully explained here, these grievances are not predicated on any universal standards of equality or justice, only a supremacist worldview.
*
HOORAY Raymond Ibrahim! List of grievances like those listed in the Declaration of Independence? Not so much. ISIS totalitarian list of demands on dhimmis, like their taqiyya talkin’ bros, the secular totalitarians of the U.S.A. (United Socialists of America)
Death and plunder ALERT!
If youd like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
..................
Related threads
Islamic State Militants Ban Mathematics, Social Studies for Children
Islamic State urges Muslims to attack Times Square with pipe bombs
Thanks for posting this article. What do you suppose that Dempsey means in his remarks and what does it mean for the “war”?
The second video is Martha McCallum with Steven Hayes - Hayes brings up the phrase that Dempsey used “Coalition will Address Grievances that cause this in the first place” which is very interesting, curious phrasing by the Joint Chiefs.
52 Seconds
Dempsey: Coalition Will ‘Address Grievances That Caused This In The First Place’
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75YAK3TMMIY
4:14 Minutes
Stephen Hayes On ISIS Hearing: White House Is ‘Not On The Same Page’
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbIXHZVYdBo
In Loopy Liblandia, Islamists are raping and beheading for the same things "everyone" wants: universal health care, transgender recognition, shorter work hours with more pay, and whatever else Libs earnestly desire for themselves.
Libs attribute to their conservative neighbors the basest and most vile motives while believing the best of apparent savages. Why do Libs think these things?
***its apparently somehow our fault that Islamic State Muslims are behaving savagely***
So, what did “WE do one thousand years ago when Yusuf ben Texum rolled out of the Sudan overthrowing the moslem kings of north Africa while calling for a return to jihad?
What did “we” do in 1884 to cause the Mahdi to roll out of Sudan again to overthrow the rulers of Khartoum and threaten Egypt?
These things always happen in muzzie land. If they set up a caliphate soon some group will try to destroy them because they are not islamic enough.
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.