At last, someone who knows the truth and is unafraid to say it. But of course, he isn't in the CIA anymore. From the Canadian Jewish News, with thanks to Ali Dashti:
A former top official of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency paints a menacing picture of the relationship between Islam and terrorism."Islamic terrorism is based on Islam as revealed through the Qu'ran," keynote speaker Bruce Tefft claimed in a panel discussion at the University of Toronto on jihad and global terrorism. The session, held late last month, was sponsored by the Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Center and the Speakers Action Group.
Tefft, a founder of the CIA's counter-terrorism center and now an advisor to the New York Police Department's intelligence and counter-terrorism divisions, said that without Islam, the long-term strategy of Al Qaeda and its followers make little sense.
Linking Osama bin Laden to the attacks against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in 2001, Tefft said: "To pretend that Islam has nothing to do with Sept. 11 is to willfully ignore the obvious and to forever misinterpret events."
In a harsh indictment of Islam - the world's fastest growing religion and the second-largest faith after Christianity - Tefft said that while there may be moderate Muslims, Islam itself is immoderate.
I have said the same thing so many times here that I wonder if Tefft is reading Jihad Watch. Or reading the works of the ultimate source of his statement, the great Ibn Warraq.
And, he added, "There is no difference between Islam and Islamic fundamentalism, which is a totalitarian construct."According to Tefft, the Qu'ran enjoins Muslims to believe that the whole world should be governed by the principles of Islam, an expansionist religion that has historically grown through conquest.
All infidels are to be converted, enslaved or killed, he said, drawing on the knowledge of Bernard Lewis, a Jewish historian who has written books about Islam and Islamic history.
Although I am not at all sure, unfortunately, that Lewis himself would endorse Tefft's analysis.
Tefft, whose career at the CIA spanned 21 years, argued that Islam was a religion of peace and tolerance in its formative phase, but has since grown intolerant of non-Muslims.
This is correct if Tefft locates the change within the lifetime of Muhammad, since it actually came around the time he moved from Mecca to Medina and became, for the first time, the leader of an army and a polity.
Islam cannot be reformed because its teachings, as revealed through the Qu'ran, are regarded as the word of God, and to be a Muslim, a believer must accept the Qu'ran on a literal basis, Tefft said.
This is very close to what I argued in Islam Unveiled: that Islamic reformers will always be reproached -- effectively -- by radicals with the charge that they are disloyal to the Qur'an and Hadith. This makes any thoroughgoing worldwide reform of Islam a longshot at best -- and emphasizes that any such reform must be a clear and emphatic rejection of Qur'anic literalism.
He said Islam views Judaism and Christianity as failed religions and itself as the only true religion.
Indeed -- and that also is abundantly attested in the Qur'an (see, to take just one example, 9:30).
Wow.
And the man spoke at the univ of toronto?!
Without getting his speech heckled or booed or insulted/slandered forcibly disrupted by the hordes of plaestinian students, other muslim students and their loony-leftist sympathizers? Now thats an improvement as good as any in the univ of toronto.
Possible that the post-purge CIA under Goss would possibly become more of a truth-based community that before.
Bravo, once again.
Now this ex-CIA official needs to be cloned a thousand times and sent to every university in America.
This story has the hive over at CAIR a bit upset, which of course makes my day. That whole freedom of speech thing just drives islamists nuts.
I expect there will be an effort to remove this person from a position of influence, and he will be neutralized.
As an aside, I read a speech given by former director Woolsey @ frontpagemag.com and was seriously disappointed with his islam is a "great religion" and the usual- "tiny minority of extremists,religious hijackers" wahabbism etc. lie-lie-lie.
I am also worried that some people of other religions will/do instinctively jump to defend islam because their own belief system will be at risk if scrutinized, ie: if islam is successfully discredited as a legitimate and reasonable belief-system, it will do further damage to all supernatural-based religious belief systems.
I guess I'm basically an athiest now, studying islam and its foolishness helped me to shed belief in religious fantasy.Similarily, studying leftism and its foolishness helped me determine that it is a dellusional dogma as well.
I am also worried that some people of other religions will/do instinctively jump to defend islam because their own belief system will be at risk if scrutinized, ie: if islam is successfully discredited as a legitimate and reasonable belief-system, it will do further damage to all supernatural-based religious belief systems
posted by kentim
There is a fundamental difference between Islam and other "supernatural-based religions." That difference is how the followers of these religions interpret and exemplify the canonical texts of their religions.
The Old Testament is rife with violence, sexism, polygamy, etc., but today's Christians do not exemplify Old Testament traditions and practices.
Muslims believe that the Qur'an is the immutable word of allah and its doctrine applies to all men for all time.
Therefore, muslims must emulate the life and hallucinations of a medieval warlord for eternity. Islam cannot be reformed; the Qur'an forbids it.
Islam is in a league of its own, a very dangerous league that threatens the freedom, peace, and security of the entire world.
Christianity ceased to be a political force centuries ago; Islam is a three-fold system of religion, politics and culture that is completely incompatible with democracy. When a religion forbids free thought and expression, how can it embrace democracy?
Although I'm normally cynical and skeptical of our government, this gives rise to some optimism and great hope that our government's silent institutional thinking may acknowledge and indeed know the truth--that the religion of peace is the root problem.
It's no secret that politicians are not the deliverers of truth, and what they say is not necessarily what they mean. Looking at it from a strictly political viewpoint, it could be argued that delcaring war on the religion of peace in the current environment may not be the brightest move. Personally, I would prefer to get straight to the point--without pussyfooting around the issue.
I would be very interested to hear Mr. Tefft's opinions about the "true" instutional position within the CIA (and other departments). But I doubt that he would be allowed to make such comments.
Susanp,
I agree with what you said 100%.And you said it very well.
But I think what you are talking about is specific doctrines.
And what I am talking about is the acceptance of dogma.
Don't think the Yahoo's over at CAIR didn't miss the change to go on one of their Islamophobic
rants,below is their news release and keep in mind CAIR has joined Dr.Elmasry at the C.I.C.
to DEMAND Shariah-Law for Muslims in CANADA.
**************************************************
For the press release on the event, see:
http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/November2004/15/c3271.html
For media coverage, see: http://www.cjnews.com/viewarticle.asp?id=5056
In a statement issued today, CAIR-CAN wrote:
"Mr. Tefft's comments were hateful, Islamophobic and have no place within a civilized Canadian discourse. Characterizing Islam as synonymous with terrorism can only lead to the demonization and marginalization of Canadian Muslims.
"It is appalling that Mr. Tefft made such statements in a public forum organized by an organization that prides itself on "fostering tolerance and understanding" and has as its goals the fighting of "bigotry, racial hatred, and ethnic intolerance."
"We are calling on the Friends of the Simon Wiesenthal Center to immediately condemn Mr. Tefft's statements and to issue an apology to Canadian Muslims.
"We would also hope that both the University of Toronto and fellow speakers and panelists repudiate Mr. Tefft's comments in the strongest possible terms."
Recently, the United Nations held a conference to deal with Islamaphobia entitled "Confronting Islamophobia: Education for Tolerance and Understanding."
-END-
Too bad Bruce isn't head of the CIA. His viewpoints on Islam are spot on. Exactly what I, and many others, have discovered over the past few years. Thanks to sites such as this and others. I'm also surprised his speech wasn't interrupted by the usual feral suspects. Thankfully it wasn't, but I wouldn't be surprised if future speeches were targetted now that they know what he has to say. Good luck, and thank you, Bruce Tefft.
ala-sux: thanks for posting that response by CAIR. It filled me with glee!
Now I have a question about islamic reform that I hope this forum could enlighten me about.
I think the differences between Islam and Christianity are too many to allow to draw a similar reform model for Islam based on reforms in Christianity. However, I want to explore the reform model in Judaism. The two religions, while different in some important pillars, are very similar in many aspects. As others mentioned here, there are many similarities between old testament and Quran, and Sharia was essentially derived from the Jewish legal code.
Now the question I am interested in is that how the Jews changed their interpretations of the old testament, when did they drop the Jewish penal code (stoning, death for apostacy and all that)? and how did they adopted and justified these changes in Judaism from a theological point of view?
Thanks in advance for the information.
ala-sux, you forgot to mention that the Canadian Muslim congress (not CIC) strongly protested AGAINST the sharia courts, while Bnai Brith Canada file a motion in court in SUPPORT of it!
Bruce Tefft's quoted remarks are to be found verbatim or almost, in the statement of Ibn Warraq issued after the World Trade Center bombing. These remarks can be found at his website, www.secularislam.org. There is nothing wrong with quoting Ibn Warraq, and because his formulas are often lapidary -- "There are moderate Muslims. Islam itself is not moderate" -such use is to be encouraged.