Muslim brothers Dzhokar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev bombed the Boston Marathon. Yet the media are once again assuring us that such attacks have nothing to do with Islam. Does the Qur’an agree?
Muslim brothers Dzhokar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev bombed the Boston Marathon. Yet the media are once again assuring us that such attacks have nothing to do with Islam. Does the Qur’an agree?
By Bill Warner
The First Amendment Center, the Muslim Brotherhood and assorted leftists at the Interfaith Alliance have produced a polished piece of apologist propaganda for Islam. It has been getting a lot media play, because it says all the things the public would like to believe about Islam. It is a textbook summary of arguments made by Islam’s apologists and serves as a teaching example of how to refute this propaganda using the scientific method.
Here is the truth about Muslims. They will not tell you the whole truth, but only a half truth. Islam is inherently dualistic and holds two opposing truths at the same time. There are two Korans, an early Koran written in Mecca and a later Koran written in Medina. There is no jihad in the early Meccan Koran, but the later Medinan Koran is filled with jihad. So which is the real Islam? Both peace and war are true Islam. A Muslim will only talk about the half he needs. But, there is one Muslim who will tell you the complete truth—Mohammed. Needless to say, this propaganda does not consult him.
Here is the second part of the analysis:
9. How do American Muslims participate in American public life?
American Muslims have created institutions of their own in the United States, just like other religious communities. There are many long-established groups such as the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), an umbrella organization of some 300 mosques and Islamic centers based in Indiana, and newer organizations like the Council for the Advancement of Muslim Professionals.
“Islamic Society of North America (ISNA)”
Whoa! ISNA is participation in American life? ISNA is pure Muslim Brotherhood; in fact, they are at the top of the list in the Muslim Brotherhood memo submitted in the Holy Land Foundation trial. And what is the Muslim Brotherhood? An organization dedicated to bringing the caliphate to rule over the entire world and to destroy our Constitution by replacing it with Sharia law.
And remember the Muslim Brotherhood motto? Here it is:
“Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. The Qur’an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.”
ISNA and all other Muslim Brotherhood types participate in American life in the sense of working to annihilate it.
10. Is Islam a political movement?
No. Islam is a religious tradition and adherents to Islam are called Muslim. Of course, American Muslims like Americans from other religious groups, participate in American political life. American Muslim voting patterns generally mirror the broader American population. American Muslims are Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, liberals, and conservatives. There is no one political platform or agenda for those who practice the religion of Islam in the United States.
“Islam is a religious tradition”
Yes, but it is also a political tradition. To prove that read the Sira, the biography of Mohammed. It is very interesting to plot the data found in the Sira about how Islam grew. Here is the plot:
The religion of Islam was a failure. In preaching the religion of Islam, Mohammed converted 150 Arabs to Islam. Then he went to Medina and became a politician and a jihadist. During the last 9 years of his life in Medina, he averaged an event of violence on the average of every 6 weeks. When Mohammed died every Arab was a Muslim. Without politics and jihad there would have never been an Islam. The religion failed, the politics succeeded.
11. Have American Muslim leaders spoken out against extremist violence?
Yes. Many American Muslim leaders and organizations have repeatedly denounced extremist violence in the strongest possible terms.
Of the many statements and actions taken by American Muslims to condemn and counter terrorism, the fatwa (religious ruling) from the Fiqh Council of North America (an Islamic juristic body) captures the views of the vast majority of American Muslims: “Islam strictly condemns religious extremism and the use of violence against innocent lives. There is no justification in Islam for extremism or terrorism.”
Fiqh Council of North America condems violence, but Islam does not condemn jihad. Jihad is neither extremism nor terrorism. The Fiqh Council of North America (a Muslim Brotherhood group) may condemn terrorism, but Allah does not.
8:12 God revealed His will to the angels, saying: ‘I shall be with you. Give courage to the believers. I shall cast terror into the hearts of the Kafirs. Strike off their heads, strike off the very tips of their fingers!’
As you read about innocence, remember that a Kafir is in perpetual rebellion against Islam. Hence, Kafirs are never innocent, but guilty of offending Allah.
The Fiqh Council of North America’s statement affirms the following Islamic principles:
“All acts of terrorism, including those targeting the life and property of civilians, whether perpetrated by suicidal or any other form of attacks, are haram (forbidden) in Islam.
“All acts of terrorism…are haram”
Well, so acts of terror are forbidden in Islam. But jihad is a community obligation for all Muslims. Jihad is not terror, but sacred violence to prepare the world for Islam and the Sharia.
Koran 2:216 You are commanded to fight although you dislike it. You may hate something that is good for you, and love something that is bad for you. Allah knows and you do not.
“It is haram (forbidden) for a Muslim to cooperate with any individual or group that is involved in any act of terrorism or prohibited violence.”
I guess that Mohammed did not get this memo, because he said, just the opposite:
[Bukhari 4,52,96] Mohammed: “Anyone who arms a jihadist is rewarded just as a fighter would be; anyone who gives proper care to a holy warrior’s dependents is rewarded just as a fighter would be.”
“It is the civic and religious duty of Muslims to undertake full measures to protect the lives of all civilians, and ensure the security and well-being of fellow citizens.”
Muslims are to undertake full measures to follow the Sunna of Mohammed and he attacked every single neighbor, without a single exception. And he did it year after year, until he ran out of enemies in Arabia and then he left Arabia to go to Syria and attack the Christians there.
12. Are American Muslims concerned about extremist violence in the United States?
Yes. Most American Muslims, like most other Americans, are deeply concerned about the problem of extremist violence committed in the name of Islam. According to the most reliable data we have, the overwhelming majority of American Muslims is well integrated into American society and report criminal activity. Over the past decade, 40% of domestic terrorism plots have been uncovered or deterred with assistance from American Muslims.[iii]
“40% of domestic terrorism plots have been uncovered or deterred with assistance from American Muslims”
Since 100% of the domestic jihad has been by Muslims, what can be said about the other 60%? What Muslims did not turn them in?
13. Do American Muslim leaders support freedom of expression and religious liberty?
“support freedom of expression and religious liberty”
Really? Then why do the Muslim Brotherhood organizations demand that only Muslims be allowed to talk about Islam to government officials? That is freedom of expression? Under pressure of Islamic leaders, no US agency can listen to a lecture about Islam if it is given by Kafirs, courtesy of Obama.
Yes. Many American Muslim leaders, educational institutions, and advocacy groups have repeatedly spoken out for freedom of expression and are actively involved in promoting religious liberty for all people both in the United States and abroad.
“promoting religious liberty for all people both in the United States and abroad”
The Center for the Study of Political Islam publishes a monthly newsletter called the Bulletin of Christian Persecution. It documents the murder, rape, kidnapping of Christians in Muslim nations. Thousands of Christians, Buddhists, and Hindus die each year at the hands of Muslims. This persecution was started 1400 years ago by Mohammed and sanctioned by Allah. Here is the liberty promised by Allah:
Koran 9:29 Fight against such of those to whom the Scriptures were given [Christians] as believe in neither Allah nor the Last Day, who do not forbid what Allah and His apostles have forbidden [follow Sharia], and do not embrace Islam, until they pay the dhimmi tax out of hand and are utterly humiliated.
Allah’s liberty for Christians includes murder until the survivors agree to live by the Sharia, pay special taxes and are humiliated.
read more at Political Islam
by PETER FARMER
If one wishes to understand the origins, ideology and goals of the modern-day Muslim Brotherhood, one must study the life and works of Egyptian theorist and writer Sayyid Qutb (1906-1966). His writings remain enormously-influential within the Ikhwan and the Pan-Islamic movement generally, and are also vitally-important to any informed understanding of such figures as Osama bin-Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri and Anwar al-Awlaki and groups such as al-Qaeda. Indeed, Qutb’s name has entered the lexicon of the Muslim world; those who follow his ideology and teachings are referred to as ”Qutbists” or simply Qutbi. Despite his importance to Sunni Islam, Qutb is relatively unknown in the non-Islamic world.
Qutb was born in 1906 in the rural village of Musha, Egypt. His father was a well-known political activist and land owner. As a teenager, Sayyid was a quiet and artistic young man; he displayed few if any outward indications of the ideologue he was later to become.
After completing studies in Cairo at Dar al-’Ulum in 1933, he took a post as a teacher in the Ministry of Public Instruction. During the 1930s, he wrote extensively, trying his hand as a novelist and literary critic. In 1939, he accepted a bureaucratic post in the Ministry of Education, while continuing to write and move within Egyptian artistic and literary circles. In 1948, Qutb traveled to the United States intent upon studying educational administration; during a two-year period abroad, Qutb studied at Woodrow Wilson Teacher’s College in Washington, D.C., at Stanford University in southern California, and at Colorado State College of Education in Greeley, Colorado. He traveled widely elsewhere in the United States during this period.
Upon his return to Egypt in 1950, Qutb resigned his civil service position, joined the Muslim Brotherhood, and quickly emerged as one of its senior leaders. He became the editor-in-chief of the journal of the Muslim Brotherhood, Al-Ikhwan al-Muslimin, and also took an active role in the propaganda section of the organization. Qutb’s sojourn abroad marked a watershed in his life; he returned to Egypt a very different man than the one who had left two years before. He had departed an unassuming and diffident man; he returned a hardened Islamic ideologue and firebrand. What had so changed him?
Shortly after his return to Cairo, Qutb wrote an impassioned article entitled “The America I Have Seen,” which provided an answer. A revealing window into his perceptions and thoughts upon the U.S. and the modern world generally, this work revealed the extent of his transformation. Qutb was fiercely critical of what he viewed as the decadence and moral degradation of Americans. He condemned everything from the individual freedoms of U.S. citizens to their materialism to what he believed to be the wanton and highly-sexualized behavior of American women. He accused his former hosts of having barbaric tastes in music and the arts, and abhorred the “animalistic mixing” of the sexes in churches and other public places. He decried the “spiritual degeneracy” of common Americans, and lamented their enjoyment of “primitive” sports such as boxing and football. His complaints even extended to the quality of the haircuts he received.
Qutb’s list of grievances did not end there; for the first time, his writings displayed his sense of racial identity and a growing hostility to American and European civilization. “The white man in Europe or America is our number-one enemy,” he wrote, “…the white man crushes us underfoot while we teach our children about his civilization, his universal principles and noble objectives.” He recommended, “Let us instead plant the seeds of hatred, disgust and revenge in the souls of these children; let us teach these children (from the time their nails are soft)…that the white man is the enemy of humanity and that they should destroy him at the first opportunity.”1
Qutb was not only critical of the United States and Europe, but modernity itself and its values – rationalism, secularism, individuality, tolerance, materialism and sexual egalitarianism. Similarly, he held an equal measure of outrage and indignation for pro-western modernists and secularists in Egypt and elsewhere within the Middle East. He reserved special contempt for the corrupt and decadent princes of Saudi Arabia, whom he viewed as unworthy of the task of guarding Islam’s holy cities of Mecca and Medina. Qutb’s emerging worldview held that modernity and Islam were fundamentally incompatible, and that Islam must be returned to its unpolluted origins. The world was divided into two camps – Islam and Jaliyya,hi i.e., the state of paganism, ignorance and barbarity that existed before the arrival of the Prophet Mohammed. The entire modern world he labeled as jahiliyya; those Muslims who supported it were takfiri – apostates and betrayers of the true faith.2
Like many others in the Muslim Brotherhood, Qutb felt that gradualism had failed to bring about an Islamic revolution in Egypt, and that more radical and violent methods would be necessary. However, in 1952, the Egyptian monarchy was overthrown by a group of nationalists headed by General Gamal Abdel Nasser. The new president and Qutb had been allies, but when the Brotherhood turned against Nasser, they became bitter adversaries. In 1954, after a failed assassination attempt against him, Nasser ordered a crackdown against the Ikhwan and imprisoned many of its high-ranking leaders, including Sayyid Qutb.
Read more at Family Security Matters
An eye-opening story concerning an Egyptian father who killed his three young daughters with snakes last April was largely missed in the West. According to Emirates24:
An Egyptian man killed his three young daughters aged 7, 5 and 3 by letting a poisonous snake bite them. According to ‘Al Youm Al Sabea’a’ newspaper, the three kids were found dead in their bed in Bani Mazar town of Al Minya governorate of upper Egypt. Forensic reports confirm the kids died due to snake poison. The man allegedly bought two cobras and let them bite the children while they were asleep so as not to be caught. He was divorced from their mother because he doubted her. He alleged that the children’s mother was in a relationship before marrying him and, therefore, denied that he fathered the kids. But she insisted he support the three daughters. However, when his second wife gave birth to a boy, he decided to do away with the children, he confessed to police under arrest.
While Emirates24 gives the story a Western spin—saying the man doubted his wife’s fidelity and the true parentage of his daughters—the Egyptian show, Al Haqiqa (“the Truth”), which devoted an episode to this matter, never mentioned this angle, but rather portrayed him as killing his daughters simply because they were girls. Among the many people interviewed who verified this was the maternal grandmother, who said that, beginning with the birth of the first daughter, the man became hostile saying “I hate girls” and had to be placated to return to his wife. This scenario was repeated more dramatically with the birth of the second daughter. When he discovered his wife was pregnant with a third daughter, he tried to poison the pregnant woman but failed. He then spent a year plotting how to kill the girls without getting caught and had even tried earlier snakes which proved ineffective, until he finally succeeded.
After stressing that the father was clearly not insane, but acted in a very deliberate manner, the host of Al Haqiqa, Wael Ibrashi, explained that “this matter deserves discussion, since these mentalities are present in Egyptian society. We never thought that these understandings that existed in pagan [jahiliyya] times concerning female infanticide would ever return, but they have returned.”
By “pagan times,” or jahiliyya, Ibrashi was alluding to a famous narrative: according to Muslim tradition, pre-Islamic Arabs used to bury their newborn infants alive, if they were daughters, but the prophet of Islam, Muhammad, outlawed female infanticide.
While this was a positive step, unfortunately, it is only half the picture. Indeed, this brutal filicide is a reminder of an often overlooked phenomenon of the Muslim world: oftentimes it is not the specific teachings of Islam that inform the actions of the average Muslim—many of whom are wholly unaware what the Koran teaches, let alone Sharia—but rather the general culture of Islam. Marshall Hodgson originally coined the term “Islamicate” to describe this phenomenon, which refers “not directly to the religion, Islam, itself, but to the social and cultural complex historically associated with Islam and the Muslims…” (The Venture of Islam, vol. 1, p.59).
Consider the issue of forced conversion. While the Koran clearly states that “there is no coercion in religion,” from the dawn of history till the present, forced conversions have been a normal aspect of Islam. Why? Because while the average Muslim may not know the letter of the law, based on the culture they grow up in, they are taught that being a non-Muslim is a terrible thing. Hence, “altruistically” compelling such hell-bound infidels to embrace Islam is seen as a good thing.
Read more at Front Page
The Hidden Origins of Islam: New Research into Its Early History by Karl-Heinz Ohlig and Gerd-R Puin (Jul 30, 2009), available at Amazon.
The standard histories of Muhammad and the early development of Islam are based on Islamic literature that dates to the ninth and tenth centuries–some two centuries or more after the death of Muhammad in 632. Islamic literary sources do not exist for the seventh and eighth centuries, when, according to tradition, Muhammad and his immediate followers lived. All that is preserved from this time period are a few commemorative building inscriptions and assorted coins.
Based on the premise that reliable history can only be written on the basis of sources that are contemporary with the events described, the contributors to this in-depth investigation present research that reveals the obscure origins of Islam in a completely new light. As the authors meticulously show, the name “Muhammad” first appears on coins in Syria bearing Christian iconography. In this context the name is used as an honorific meaning “revered” or “praiseworthy” and can only refer to Jesus Christ, as Christianity was the predominant religion of the area at this time. This same reference exists in the building inscription of the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem, built by the caliph `Abd al-Malik.
The implication of these and other findings here presented is that the early Arab rulers adhered to a sect of Christianity. Indeed, evidence from the Koran, finalized at a much later time, shows that its central theological tenets were influenced by a pre-Nicean, Syrian Christianity. Linguistic analysis also indicates that Aramaic, the common language throughout the Near East for many centuries and the language of Syrian Christianity, significantly influenced the Arabic script and vocabulary used in the Koran. Finally, it was not until the end of the eighth and ninth centuries that Islam formed as a separate religion, and the Koran underwent a period of historical development of at least 200 years.
(Source: Amazon description of ‘The hidden origin of islam’ by Ohlig, Puin et. al)
Last night’s Islam: The Untold Story will have made uncomfortable viewing for some people. It certainly seemed to be for one of the featured experts, Seyyed Hossein Nasr, an Iranian Islamic philosopher who had the look of a man whose faith is facing the rising tide of scepticism and godlessness. It is one Christians from the past century and a half, from the early days of higher criticism to the recent plummet in religious attendance, will recognise well.
In this atmospheric and intelligent documentary Tom Holland, whose recently published In The Shadow of the Sword took the burgeoning study of early Islam to a popular audience, looked at the early history of the religion and sought to explain what evidence we have for the traditional history, as viewed by the faithful.
“The evidence is almost nonexistent,” he says. “When you start looking, everything is up for grabs.”
The peoples of antiquity, whether Persians, Greeks, Egyptians or Romans, saw the Arabs as a backwards, obscure people from the desert. As for their religion, they worshipped a number of deities, including cubes, although there were Christian and Jewish communities scattered along the Arabian Peninsula.
But in the seventh century these “despised” people rode out of the desert and embarked on a series of conquests that would soon have them running an empire that stretched from central Asia to the Loire Valley.
And yet the strangest thing about this period, known by posterity as “the Muslim conquest”, is that there is little evidence that they were Muslims at all. When the Arabs arrived in Jerusalem in 636 under Caliph Umar Ibn Al Khattab none of the chroniclers of the period have anything to say about what religion the new conquerors were.
Palestine had been under the control of the Byzantines, who had expanded the number of churches and encouraged Christian settlers, leading to much friction with the Jews. The new masters, who had just smashed a Byzantine army five times as large, seemed to look at Jewish sites with reverence, which led some Jews to see them as saviours and many Christians to feel paranoid about a Jewish reconquest.
And yet no one describes them as “Muslim”; nor does the Arab ruler of Jerusalem mention the Prophet Mohammed anywhere.
Read more at the Telegraph
Here is the trailer:
Historian Tom Holland explores how a new religion – Islam – emerged from the seedbed of the ancient world, and asks what we really know for certain about the rise of Islam.
The result is an extraordinary detective story.
Traditionally, Muslims and non-Muslims alike have believed that Islam was born in the full light of history. But a large number of historians now doubt that presumption, and question much of what Muslim tradition has to tell us about the birth of Islam.
As a result, Tom finds himself embroiled in what, for 40 years now, has been an underground but seismic debate: the issue of whether, as Muslims have always believed, Islam was born fully formed in all its fundamentals, or else evolved gradually, over many years – and in ways that Muslims today might not necessarily recognise.
So who was the historical Muhammad, and where – if not from God – might the Qur’an, the Holy Book of Islam, actually have come from?
By asking these questions, Tom – as a non-Muslim – has no choice, over the course of the film, but to negotiate the fault-line that runs between history and religion, between doubt and faith.
Could this be the real Arab Spring? This is huge! The Muslim world does not have to blame Pastor Terry Jones anymore for burning the Quran or non-Muslims for desecrating it. They are now in shock over seeing a YouTube post of an Egyptian young man doing the unthinkable on camera: tearing up the Quran and putting it in the trash.
This is a summary translation of what he said:
There it is, Allah’s book, this is the basic catastrophe. I don’t know what day it is of this disgusting month of Ramadan! You are making the tearing of the Quran such a big and dangerous thing.. it is instinctive to tear this book, those sons of —– think they can threaten me and challenge me to tear the Quran, but I want to proof to them that they are nothing and what is the big deal in tearing this book!! There it is (he starts tearing the Quran) in the trash. Are you feeling better now! You cannot touch a hair in my head! We keep blaming Hamas and Gaza, but it is not them, it is this son of —– book that I am stepping on right now. That book is the source of all evil and the real catastrophe. There is nothing new here, it is not Omar Abdel Rahman, Abbud or all the others, it is this garbage that is causing us to run in a demonic never-ending circle that will never end.
The young man’s worlds were very insulting, but, unfortunately, this is the same language that Muslims commentators of this video use against him and against anyone who leaves Islam. The comments on this video are extremely violent and scary, and more insulting than anything this young man may have said in the video. This is the kind of language many Muslims use against any critique of Islam. I am very worried about this young man, who seems to be living in Egypt. There are hundreds of fatwas of death issued against him already, and the responses to the video threaten him: “I will kill you” or “I will cut your tongue, your ears, your arms and legs, like Mohammed, and leave you for dead.”
Instead of giving religious visas to Islamists who come to build mosques in America and preach hate, the U.S. should immediately declare that anyone who leaves Islam and is threatened will get priority visa to the U.S., ahead of Islamists. American embassies across the Muslim world should stop giving religious visas, especially to those who are obviously Islamists, because by doing that, we are breeding our own home-grown terrorists inside America.
Throughout the history of Islam, many people were tortured, beheaded, limbs cut, jailed, ostracized — and for as little as accidentally stepping on the Quran. The sharia punishment for blasphemy of the Quran and Mohammed is death, even if the perpetrator pleads that it was an accident and that he never meant to desecrate the Quran. There is a Filipino maid in the Arab Gulf who was jailed for accidentally sitting on a Quran which was on a sofa. Now the Muslim world is starting to face the nightmare of a new kind of challenge from within: Muslims deliberately challenging this taboo and putting their lives on the line.
Islamic customs have elaborate rituals giving the highest esteem to the book itself and physically protecting the Quran from any disrespect. I remember, as a child, placing a schoolbook on top of the Quran on a table — my grandparents harshly scolded me for doing that. The message was often repeated over and over again to never, ever place anything visually or mentally on top of the Quran. In the same year the Arabs conquered the Christian city of Alexandria in Egypt, 639 AD, the Alexandria Library was burned, and the Quran became the one and only source of knowledge to the country.
I truly believe that the beginning of the end of Islam as we know it is underway. That will be the true Arab Spring. The violence we are seeing today in the Arab world will accelerate when such confrontations to Islam increase and when the Muslim world wakes up from its 1,400-year slumber.
In the last chapter of my latest book The Devil We Don’t Know, I predicted that Islam will fall like a house of cards, but the bloodshed will be huge, and the world must leave the Muslim world to settle this on its own. This is the only way for Muslims to learn about their true enemy: sharia and Islam itself as it is practiced today. The number-one enemy of Islam is the truth, and with today’s technology, many Muslims are seeing the truth clearly on the internet, with satellite dishes, and via mobile devices.
Read more at American Thinker
Nonie Darwish is author of The Devil We Don’t Know.
Based on the study by Center for the Study of Political Islam
Dr. Bill Warner has done a statistical analysis of the Trilogy (Koran, Hadith, Sira) which cuts through the confusion caused by Dualism in Islam. Visit his site, Political Islam, to learn more. He has authored many books and booklets which are available on his site.
Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs
The United States of America is under siege and the coup near complete. A new government study (paid for with your taxpayer dollars) reads like an al qaeda reader. The study says “Muslim terrorists are widely misunderstood and don’t wish to impose Islam around world as is commonly believed in the west, they simply murder innocent people to defend against foreign attacks by enemies of Islam.”
Sure had us and all other freeedom loving peoples fooled. /sarc off
This is the kind of jihad propaganda written by Muslim Brotherhood operative like CAIR, ISNA or Obama White House adviser Dalia Mogahed. Imam Rauf’s verbal diarhhea has take hold at think tanks and universities across this land.
U.S. Study: Terrorists Aren’t “Aggressive Offensive Foe Seeking Domination” Judicial Watch, July 11, 2012
A new government study says Muslim terrorists are widely misunderstood and don’t wish to impose Islam around world as is commonly believed in the west, they simply murder innocent people to defend against foreign attacks by enemies of Islam.
At least that’s what the experts at a public university in Arizona have determined. They offer details and make rather comical recommendations to counter terrorism in a taxpayer-funded study released this week. The highly-regarded academics operate a special center dedicated to studying the role of communication in combating terrorism, promoting national security and successfully engaging in public diplomacy worldwide.
To fulfill this mission, the center gets big bucks from the U.S. government. In fact, earlier this year it got a rather generous $6.1 million grant from the Department of Defense (DOD) for a neurophysiological study involving narrative comprehension and persuasion. The center’s biggest project, however, is a six-year, $4.5 million study on Islamist extremists’ use of narrative to influence contested populations in the Middle East, Southwest Asia, North Africa and Europe.
That brings us back to this week’s rather sympathetic report (How Islamist Extremists Quote the Qur’an) portraying Muslim terrorists as misunderstood by westerners. It spans 14 pages, but here is the gist of it; based on how they quote religious texts (Quran), Islamic extremists are not “an aggressive offensive foe seeking domination and conquest of unbelievers, as is commonly assumed. Instead they deal with themes of victimization, dishonor and retribution.”
Really? 164 Jihad Verses in the Koran
The report continues: “The verses frequently utilized by extremists” address subjects such as “enduring hardships and the importance of fighting against the unjust unbelievers who oppress men, women and children.” This shows close integration with the rhetorical vision of Islamist extremism, according to the brilliant academics that compiled this on the government’s dime.
Now that we better understand these violent terrorists, researches recommend that the west abandon claims that Islamist extremists seek world domination, focus on counteracting or addressing claims of victimization, emphasize alternative means of deliverance and work to undermine the “champion” image sought by extremists. After all, “studies” have shown that al Qaeda-linked militants are 38 times more likely to kill a Muslim than a member of another group, according to these researchers, who say this is hardly the activity of a “competent champion.”
It is important to be realistic about Islamists’ arguments when trying to counter their influence attempts, says a professor to co-authored this study. “If we try to portray them as evil conquerors when their audience sees them as protectors and champions, it damages our credibility and makes our communication less effective,” he said. The report’s lead author confirmed that “what extremists are really saying to Muslims is ‘our communities are under siege and God will defend us if we have faith and courage’.”
Yes, best not portray evil as evil, they might go evil on us.
Go to The Religion of Peace for an accurate study on violence in the Quran and to see the verses in the Quran and Hadith calling on all Muslims to war with non believers for the sake of Islamic rule.