Tunisia: 'You Cannot Have Moderate Fanatics'

Shock horror! Imagine: the mainstream media whitewashing the jihadist views of an Islamic supremacist leader! It’s unprecedented! Shocking beyond measure! “Media Whitewash Ghannouchi’s Radical Islamist Views,” from IPT News, October 31 via JW:

A recurring media theme in recent days is that Rachid al-Ghannouchi and his Ennahda Party, which won last week’s Tunisian elections, are “moderate” Islamists despite considerable evidence to the contrary.


A few notable voices in the conservative blogosphere like Martin Kramer, Melanie Phillips and Raymond Ibrahim pointed out problems with this argument, including Ghannouchi’s endorsement of jihad in Gaza, stating that “Gaza, like Hanoi in the ’60s and Cuba and Algeria, is the model of freedom today.” Ghannouchi has expressed support for suicide bombings and welcomes the destruction of Israel, which he predicts could “disappear” by 2027.

“There is no such thing as ‘moderate Islamism,'” Phillips wrote. “It’s as absurd as saying there were moderate and extreme Stalinists, or moderate and extreme Nazis, or moderate and extreme proponents of the Spanish Inquisition. You cannot have moderate fanatics.”

Meanwhile, the malevolent gang of  NGO’s who assist the African surplus population to invade our countries calls on the EU to resettle more  criminal welfare seekers from Africa…..


That message apparently hasn’t reached some U.S. media and political elites. Before and after Tunisia’s election, news outlets provided a steady stream of stories portraying the group as moderate and committed to democracy.

Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) wrote a Wall Street Journal op-ed (which he  republished on his Senate website) declaring that “Ennahda has been giving encouraging answers about its rejection of extremism and its respect for the democratic process, individual liberties, women’s rights and the rule of law.”

The headline of a front-page New York Timesstory referred to Ennahda as “moderate.” The Times quoted Ghannouchi (the founder of the party) saying that Ennahda “is not a religious party” but one whose members “merely draw their values from Islam.” The Times added that the group’s win at the polls in Tunisia “was sure to embolden those who favor a more liberal approach, including some within Egypt’s mainstream Muslim Brotherhood.”

Another Timesstory began: “For more than three decades, Rachid al-Ghannouchi has preached that pluralism, democracy and secular Islam are harmonious.”

These and other media accounts gloss over or neglect to mention Ghannouchi’s many radical statements – particularly his calls for Israel’s destruction.

The Arab Spring “will achieve positive results on the path to the Palestinian cause and threaten the extinction of Israel,” he said in a May interview with the Al Arab Qatari website. “The liberation of Palestine from Israeli occupation represents the biggest challenge facing the Umma [Muslim people] and the Umma cannot have existence in light of the Israeli occupation.”

In the same interview, Ghannouchi said: “I give you the good news that the Arab region will get rid of the bacillus of Israel. Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, the leader of Hamas, said that Israel will disappear by the year 2027. I say that this date may be too far away, and Israel may disappear before this.”

This is consistent with Ennahda’s platform, which declares that the group “struggles to achieve the following goals … To struggle for the liberation of Palestine and consider it as a central mission and a duty required by the need to challenge the Zionist colonial attack which planted in the heart of the homeland an alien entity which constitutes a (sic) obstacle to unity and reflects the image of the conflict between our civilization and its enemies.”

Read it all.

One thought on “Tunisia: 'You Cannot Have Moderate Fanatics'”

  1. Tunisia’s mosques face “gradual conquest by the most hardline Islamists”

    The Tiny Minority of Extremists again turns out to be less tiny than advertised. A few months ago, the stock answer to concerns along these lines would likely have been that Tunisia is a modern, moderate Muslim country, and even if there a few whackos, this sort of thing can’t happen.

    The foreign policy of the last two administrations has had a consistent track record of confusing conditions that exist in spite of Sharia as existing because of it. “Tunisia: Radical Imams looking to conquer mosques,” from ANSAmed, November 3:

    (ANSAmed) – TUNIS – Tunis is already in the midst of fierce debate over its future, after the unexpected victory – at least in its scale – of the Islamist party Ennadha in elections for the country’s Constituent Assembly, but the country now finds itself facing a problem whose seriousness remains undefined but that does not appear to have a solution, namely the gradual conquest by the most hardline Islamists of the country’s mosques, which are hugely important from a theological point of view as well as for the number of worshippers who attend them.
    What to Djemel Oueslati, the head of the Department of Religious Affairs, appears to be a simple statistic (hardliners control between 150 and 200 mosques throughout a country that has around 5,000, he told Reuters) is in fact a matter open to serious concern. Indeed, the advance of “pure” Muslims appears unstoppable, not least because of the speed at which it is occurring and, especially, with the state seemingly devoid of instruments with which to tackle it, if indeed it were to decide to do so.
    We tried to tell you.

    This situation has not cemented itself in the last few weeks.
    The phenomenon had already begun in the days following the dramatic fall of Zine El Abidine Ben Ali. The toppling of the dictator created a power vacuum that was attended to only in theory by the appointment of a provisional government, with utmost confusion regarding roles and jurisdiction, while the situation paved the way for an aggressive strategy by hardliners who, after being opposed and repressed in the 23 years of Ben Ali’s regime, took advantage of the flight of the hated dictator and moved to take control of as many mosques as possible, a manifestation of real power, not only in the religious sense.
    Slowly but surely, therefore, the fundamentalists, who are close to Salafist ideology began to “conquer” mosques controlled by moderate imams, who were forced to sneak out amid pressure of the most hardline groups, who used religious but also more “concrete” tactics to achieve their goal.
    Mosques are officially controlled by the state, through the Ministry of Religious Affairs, which has the final say in the supervision of places of worship and of the behaviour of imams.
    But, with the revolution and the elimination of one of the regime’s raisons d’etre – the state’s prevalence over religion, upholding the country’s secularity), this control has disintegrated and is now restricted to a handful of formal acts.
    Whether or not this is admitted, the real problem is that controlling mosques also means controlling its worshippers, the majority of whom observe all rites and prayers and can be influenced by the aggressive preaching of the most fanatical clerics. (ANSAmed).


Comments are closed.