Posted on 09/19/2016 8:54:45 PM PDT by Hugin
Sorry for the rare vanity, but I don't have an article for this. While the left's steadfast refusal to Islamic terror by that name is awful, the right's use of "radical Islamic terror" also bothers me. While it certainly is radical by Western standards, there really is nothing new or radical about ISIS, Al Qaeda and other jihadists by Islamic standards. Calling them that perpetuates the lie that they are a tiny bunch outside the norms of Islam. However just calling them "Islamic" doesn't account for the population of Muslims that don't share their goals.
Today I was watching an interview with the head of a Muslim group that is opposed to those groups and their apologists in organizations like CAIR. He made the point that by not profiling those people the government is allowing them to terrorize Muslims who believe as he does into keeping quiet. What really got my attention was the use of the term "theocratic Islam" which he specifically included regimes like Saudi Arabia, Iraq, etc. as well as groups like the Muslim Brotherhood and CAIR. I think "theocratic Islam" is a great term that clarifies the real issue like nothing else, and includes groups that espouse their ideology and not just those that are out committing violence. '
Thanks. I’ve been around, but I don’t post many articles, and generally try to keep my comments short and on point, with maybe a bit of humor.
“Muslim supremacists”
I'll second that. "Historical Islam," as opposed to "Reformed Islam." I saw someone on the internet use this term a few weeks ago.
To say that the majority of them do not engage in terror acts is correct. To say that the majority of them do not support terrorism sadly is incorrect.
The stated goal of the mohammedan is the subjection of the entire world by force.
According to moHAMmadens moHAM HEAD is the perfect man and the koran is the actual, true and perfect word of allah (may pigs be upon him).
mohammed was a slaver, a rapist, a pedophile, a murderer, a liar and a thief.
The koran commands that true mohammadens emulate mohammed, to convert, enslave or kill all Infidels, i.e., unbelievers.
satanic or demon spawn works too, though.
I recommend calling them “targets.”
There ya go. Anything else is a cop out.
“islamic savagery”
He should have been snuffed on 15 July. But he speaks the truth.
That's how Sir Winston spelled it in 1899, when he was a 25-year-old soldier / war correspondent:
How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity.The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property—either as a child, a wife, or a concubine—must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen: all know how to die. But the influence of the religion paralyzes the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science—the science against which it had vainly struggled—the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.
Read it several times. It is a superb description of the problem of Islam!
“Theocratic Islam” makes it sound to folks like it is a religion, you know, like Christianity of Buddhism.
Islam and radical Islam both pursue the same goal of the entire under the submission of Allah with Sharia Law. It is radical Islam that wants that goal to happen a little faster.
Those Moslems who don’t want to go jihad all over the infidels re apostates by Moslem standards and subject to the death penalty which can be carried out by any Moslem.
Islam is demonic, therefore Satanism is an accurate name.
In another reality, perhaps. I can't imagine a more ambiguous label. Every sect in that insane culture would claim the title. VIA pickup-truck-mounted artillery, if necessary.
My choice (not subject to change) is Mass Murdering Muslims, and Secular muslims. That acknowledges reality.
The only clear difference between them would be that one never employs medieval methods of horrible torture and execution; the other does.
All with one very important proviso. Should the MMMs decide to export their medieval violence, they would ne subject to instant and certain execution by means of firing squad, by world-wide agreement. No age limits.
Islamic Imperialism - the spread of Islam by any (and all) methods whether peaceful or not.
I like it. Moves Islam from a constitutionally protected religious movement to an unprotected political movement.
Which it is.
Hysterical Islam, I say.
Agreed.
There is no way to dress it up to make some aspects acceptable.
Islam is straight out of hell.
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.