“Islamism”

Tiny minority of excremists vs “Islamists”

Anti-U.S. protesters in Dhaka, BangladeshIn “Islam Vs. Islamism: A Case for Wishful Thinkers,” by Walid Shoebat at PJ Media, May 18, Shoebat provides a full case for not using the misleading and inaccurate term “Islamism.” I wrote on this question here; Pamela Geller here; and Andrew Bostom here.

“Our killer question is ‘How do you propose to defeat Islamism?’ Those who make all Islam their enemy not only succumb to a simplistic and essentialist illusion but they lack any mechanism to defeat it.”

This is what historian and Middle East analyst Daniel Pipes asks in his recent Washington Times article.

To support his argument, Pipes makes an unsubstantiated claim that a majority of Muslims are moderate and that Islamism is only,

supported by 10-15 percent of Muslims…  (here’s more)

Now we have Rod Liddle from the Spectator going down that same road:

To draw a line between moderate and extremist Islam is to miss the point

Islam is a noble and peaceable faith which we must all respect, whereas Islamism is a corrosive  and aggressive political ideology, and the two — weirdly — have nothing to do with one another. This is a patent nonsense, a delusion, and while it may work as a form of crowd control, it will not help us win this battle.

Rod Liddle in the Spectator  gets close, but he also misses the point. No Muslim ever uses terms like “Islamism” (Islam is Islam and that’s it, said Tayyip Erdogan, PM of Turkey)  and what we call ‘moderate Muslims” usually turn into nasty  little headchoppers when we scratch the surface.

We  would be well advised to see Muslims the way they see themselves, not like we would like to see them.

Rod Liddle also claims:

” It is indisputable that the vast majority of British Muslims were as disgusted by the events in Woolwich as the rest of us were “– really?

Why is that “indisputable?” Because the alternative would be ‘too horrible to contemplate?’ 

I daresay the vast majority of Muslims in Britain was not disgusted at all. Prove me wrong!

6 thoughts on ““Islamism””

  1. Mark Steyn

    Daniel Pipes, a regular contributor round these parts, appeared on a somewhat fractious panel in Toronto recently, and toward the end (scroll down) was asked where the “moderate Muslims” were. He responded that many of them were in the room. Indeed, it seems entirely possible that all of them were in the room. Daniel eventually took a crack at the numbers and concluded that “Islamists” made up 10 to 15 percent of the Muslim population, “moderates” about 1 to 2 percent, and the remaining 85 percent in between are presumably either cowed or indifferent.

    I’ve no idea whether Daniel’s estimate is correct, although, in my experience, “moderate Muslims” invariably turn out on closer inspection to be apostates or so syncretic as to be barely recognizable as co-religionists to their livelier brethren. But I thought of Daniel’s words after the murder of Drummer Lee Rigby in Woolwich, when as is traditional the vast army of non-Muslim Muslim scholars, from David Cameron down, rushed forward to explain that beheadings on London streets are “nothing to do with Islam.” Unfortunately, it seems to be rather more dangerous for actual Muslims to make the same point. (More)

  2. The made-up words of Daniel Pipes “IslamISM(?)”, or from the other Westen analysts “IslamIST(?) extremists(?)”, “moderate(?) Muslims”, etc.

    … MUST also like the devout Muslims REFER TO ALLAH’s SADISTIC QURAN e.g. 10:4 “… But those who disbelieved will have a DRINK OF SCALDING WATER and a painful punishment for what they used to deny.”

    (vs. German Constitution Art. 2, 2 everyone has the right of phyical integrity)

    http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=10&verse=4

  3. video, 2 Min Warfare against non-Muslims until the world is “cleaned” for Islam

    3 Min “… There is no ‘moderate’ Islam. There is no ‘radical’ Islam.
    There is just Islam and the Quran”

    Allah’s war covenant with the Muslims

    “… Sword-jihad is a religious obligation laid on Muslims by Allah (2:216). Allah buys the Muslims’ souls as his slaves (9:111) to perform relentless (47:35) sword-jihad against non-Muslims until all non-Muslims are vanquished (3:139, 47:35). In recompense for the risks of war, Allah promises that the Mujahideen (Bukhari Book 52, No. 72; No. 50, 51 53) will have a great reward (4:74, 4:95 4:76). This “great reward” is multi-faceted: Allah guarantees absolution from all sins (including, implicitly, war-crimes) and immunity from hell (61:10-13). Furthermore, those that die during sword-jihad are guaranteed entry to paradise immediately (3:195) whereas those that survive will get war-booty (4:74) eventually equalling all the wealth of the world (48:20-21) and guaranteed entry to paradise on their deaths. Allah also promises quick victories (61:10-13).

    This agreement is seen as a (holy) covenant between Allah and the Muslims (33:15,23). …”

    9:111 “slay and are slain” for promised paradise “… that is the achievement supreme.”
    … which fulfills 9:5 “Kill the unbelievers (in the ONEness of Allah, mushrikun) wherever ye find them” + 9:29 “Fight those who believe not in Allah”

    Destroy the Qur-ân, or be destroyed by it!

    2:216 “Fighting is prescribed upon you”

    http://schnellmann.org/islamic-concepts-misunderstood-by-westerners.html#war-covenant

  4. Regarding the CV of the muslim who will not walk with the EDL

    As suspected – muntasir is the chief of a muslim based charity JIMAS, His resume seems to be intended to convey the idea that he is a top line IT consultant – this he is not. I will check on his real IT credentials, but you do not become a top line IT person by running islamic marrage and fund raising activities. He may have worked in a minor role in some IT businesses, but he does not appear to have ever been a major contributor. The claim he makes is similar in nature to that made by Morsi. Additionally the school from which it got its qualifications is not top grade in this field. There seems to be a little bit more to the man and his backers than what is available to the public eye. That he has backers seems certain – who they are should be a concern.

  5. While it is good to display these texts here so that people can see what muslims really believe, or rather that what they believe is self-contradictory and based upon a rather flawed world view, I think it makes more sense to start sending these materials to politicians, to engage these politicians in open debate whilst including some radical muslims as well. These discussion have to be closely controlled, since muslim debate is screaming mindless abuse at the other side, but it will be easy to achieve the goal of making these islamists look like the mindless thugs/fools that they are.

  6. Sometimes it seems Pipes just can’t make up his mind about islam. It is like a philosophy class I took. The point was to argue the point/subject but not to make a decision on it. that is what Pipes reminds me of doing. I wish he would keep his yap shut. He is not being very helpful sometimes. ‘islamists’ are moslems. ‘moderates’ are moslems. And ‘extremists’ are moslems. I would also like to add that ‘reformists’ are moslems. The last group I would not trust either since they only argue in front of non-moslems mostly and not in front of their own – and that sounds like Muslim Brotherhood tactics.

Comments are closed.