This tweet from Ed Husain is no doubt tongue-in-cheek, but note its import: clearly it is an attempt to exonerate the jihad terror group Hamas by equating its murderous mission to the American Revolutionary slogan that is the motto of the state of New Hampshire. Simultaneously Husain minimizes the bloodiness of Hamas and advances a sly moral equivalence argument equating American Revolutionaries with genocidal Islamic jihadists who celebrate the murders of civilians.
And this from a "normal Muslim." Ed Husain is a prominent non-violent Muslim who recently wrote a piece in the reliably dhimmi Wall Street Journal entitled "Don't Call Me Moderate, Call Me Normal." In it, he claimed that "normative Islam is inherently pluralist" and "supported by 1,000 years of Muslim history in which religious freedom was cherished." He said nothing in this, not surprisingly, about dhimmitude, or about the deprivations, discrimination and harassment suffered by non-Muslims in Islamic societies for centuries.
Normal Ed is also the author of The Islamist, a book about how he entered and then left the jihadist group Hizb ut-Tahrir. In 2007 he wrote a piece in The Guardian, "Stop supporting Bin Laden," about how Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Ibn Warraq and I are -- unwittingly, of course -- playing into the hands of Osama bin Laden himself.
His claim (which is by no means original with him -- this is a familiar Islamic supremacist talking point) is that because I -- and Hirsi Ali, and Ibn Warraq, and others -- point out that there is a broad and deeply rooted tradition of violence and supremacism within Islam, therefore we are marginalizing other Islamic traditions and legitimizing bin Laden. In saying this, Husain implies that jihadism is clearly an Islamic heresy, and that there is a broad tradition within Islam that rejects violence against non-Muslims and Islamic supremacism -- and that Hirsi Ali, Ibn Warraq and I are ignoring or downplaying it out of some base motives. Bin Laden or someone like him invented jihadism and grafted it onto a religion that has otherwise peaceful teachings.
In reality, however, while there are a few courageous reformers out there, all -- not just one, or a few, but all -- the orthodox sects and schools of Islamic jurisprudence all teach that it is part of the responsibility of the Islamic community to wage war against unbelievers and subjugate them under the rule of Islamic law (references can be found here). There is no sect or school recognized as orthodox that rejects this.
It is not playing into bin Laden's hands to point it out; in fact, it is playing into bin Laden's hands to deny it and denigrate those who point out that it is so, for there can be no reform of what one will not admit needs reforming. There are some disagreements between modern jihadism and traditional jihad theology: modern jihad is all defensive, as there is no caliph authorized to call offensive jihad, and some assert that only the state authority can call jihad in any case. But these disagreements do not touch on the central point: that it is legitimate to wage religious war. If Ed Husain wishes to pretend to the world that the situation of Islamic theology and jurisprudence is other than what it is, how sincere a reformer can he be? Wouldn't a genuine reformer acknowledge the existence of problematic passages and doctrines and formulate new ways to understand them, rather than pretending that they don't exist at all -- except in the minds of violent fanatics and those he would have you believe are merely hatemongers?
Muslims who do not believe in (among other horrors) murder, lying, and paedophile marriage, are apostate. The penalty for that is execution according to Mohamed.
And, which "1,000 years" is he talking about? Even at face value, that leaves out almost 400 years. And, we all know Muhammad wasn't tolerant of other religions or worldviews: ask a Jew from Medina or an Arabian polytheist, let alone a Christian from Tabuk.
What do Muslims know about freedom - nothing, zilch!! They are mental slaves of Mo/allah. They can never come out of this bondage and they are comparing Hamas to NH - LOL...
There is no normal Muslim, free Muslim, moderate Muslim,or such. these are all oxymorans!! All Muslims worship this pedophile, rapist, murderer criminal And they can't see this or are willing to admit it and they talk about being free - utter height of stupidity!!
Ed Husain is in a serious theolgical pentagon.
. ..Apos, Pentagram, tyos.
During the Cold War, I don't remember communist sympathizers writing op-eds and books celebrating the compassionate virtues of communism in mainstream publications in this country. I suppose the FBI and IRS would have made their lives miserable.
It sounds like Honest Ed needs to get his ears cleaned out.
The Hamas slogan is "Live a slave (of Allah) or die." Not "Live free or die."
The NH motto might be regarded in a more sinister light if the Hampshireans believed that Maine was their rightful homeland, from which they had been chased out by the Mainers; and if they regularly fired rockets into Maine; and if they held rallies with mobs chanting "all Mainers must die!"
During the Cold War, I DO remember lots of articles by leftists about the wonders and achievements of one communist country or another. We were told that in those countries, unlike the nasty capitalist U.S., there was true equality -- no segregation, no Jim Crow, no privileged millionaires. Quality education was available to all, not just the wealthy few. Likewise for quality medical care. One communist country after another was presented as a shining example for us to follow: first Russia, then China, then Vietnam and Cuba. Chairman Mao, Ho Chi Minh, and Castro were all presented as heroes; Castro still is.
Actually, Hamas' motto is "Live Free AND Die", so there is a difference; New Hampshire wants you to live free. Hamas wants you to die.
Indeed. McCarthy was ruined by 1954. There were plenty of bizarro world based leftist reporting on the wonders of communist countries in the remaining decades of the cold war. McCarthy was a villain, but his leftist enemies then turned around with a blind eye and praised villains many times as evil.
Much like the leftists who hate fundamentalist Christians for many good reasons (often personal history based oppression), then turn around with a blind eye and support and side with Islamic supremacists who are many times as evil.
What does a muslim know about freedom, anyway?
He might as well be in the Pentagon. They're going to have some free space on one side, from now on.
it is funny you should ask this!!! they really dont. spceailly the freedom of speech!! do you remmebr the pastor in Florida who wanted to burn a Koran? I talk to family on a daily basis in Iran and my sister was asking why is he going to burn the Koran? I tried to explain to her that hear in America it is part of the free speech and you don't go to jail for it. she kept telling that this is respectful. and then when I asked her that the Iranian government just siezed 6000 bibles and burn them did they rion in the west. she then did not have much to say!!!
Nothing new here. Just another of mo's troglodytes riding on the coat tails of another culture and claiming them as islamic inventions.
ed hussien ... pah!,another one that self-righteous
mozzam begg ... people!, they are ALL of the same cloth
the clue ought to have been "wrote for the guardian"
ie no surprises
i WAS DEVOSTATED TO FIND OUT MY WIFE WAS having an affair.
but by turning to religion I soon came to terms with. I converted to Islam and stoned her to death!!!!
Just foe laughs on a Monday morning!!
When cornered, Muslims sometimes say - 'you are not a Muslim' - and in a way they are right - because people outside - although they purport to understand Islam - cannot understand the fear that the Muslim feels.
So that the 'moderates' like Ed and others can't come against - jihad - and those sentiments and laws that spring from - Koran verse 9:29 - because the violence and supremacist aspects of the religion - are viewed in a religious context - or as a part of the whole.
Knowing that this violence or ill-treatment could be perpetrated against them - if they are deemed to be acting in a non-Muslim / 'heretical' way - it is excused.
When a person says - 'I'm a good Muslim' - what they are saying is - I should not be attacked - I should be treated as a superior. The problem when the Muslim world comes to the western world - there are no laws to back religious piety - in an Islamic framework. Which is one of the reasons Muslims want religious laws - because under these, there would be a reward for adherence to Islamic religious behaviour - and therefore the alternative has to be a penalty for not practising that behaviour. Those who practise the behaviour/ritual/custom/you-have-it would be given priority under the law and those who don't, should expect to be penalised.
The problem - with the Islamic-Xanadu-bubble - is that most often those who do not practise these Islamic rituals - are the non-Muslims.
And in a world where people are seen as equals - it amounts to subjugation, and the breaking of religious freedoms and freedom of conscience.
It is hard for anyone to tell the dedicated Muslim - how over their world-as-they-knew-it is. As freedom is contagious. It is an idea that spreads.
And in the west - proudly - the laws allow us to be free and live!!
I wasn't aware New Hampshire was a part of a Jihad to push Massachusetts into the sea. And aside from 4th of july celebrations, they don't fire rockets too often.
Hamas's motto isn't live free or die. It's "death for the sake of Allah is our most coveted desire".
Specifically "Allah is our goal, the prophet is our model, the Koran is our constitution , jihad is our path and death for the sake of Allah is our most coveted desire"
"Live free" is the salient point in New Hampshires motto. Where is there mention of freedom in Hamas's motto? In fact Hamas' motto is the exact opposite of New Hampshires.
And notice that they don't specify WHO's death for the sake of allah they seek to cause.
That's human sacrafice if you actually look at what "death for the sake of allah" actually means. I don't believe New Hampshire endorses killing people for the sake of their god. Not even the Wiccans who live up there are that bug eyed crazy.
So no, "live free or die" and "death (of whoever we can get our hands on) for the sake of Allah" do not express precisely the same sentiment.
As ebonystone and Truthiocity have already indicated, the comparison is inapt because New Hampshirites want only New Hampshire. They don't want Maine. They don't want Massachusetts (who does?). And they don't want the rest of the world either. They just want New Hampshire. By contrast, Islam wants all the world, every last damn acre of it. If this is all Ed Husain's got, he ain't got much.
People whose understanding of Islamic history has been seived through Al Qur'an seem to suffer from Al Zheimers - Arabic for elective memory.
Ed Husain's a clown!
The tweet was probably an off hand snarky comment, not well thought out. But Robert does Ed Hussein a service by providing this critique.
So many of the Muslims I have seen interviewed recently, proclaim themselves to be Muslims and "all Americans" also take offense at the way Islam is characterized and criticized. And similar to Ed, they seem not to take seriously the inherent violent and negative aspects of Islam which they deny or ignore. They proclaim: "I'm a Muslim and I'm not like that, so Islam is good because I'm OK."
To criticize Islam becomes a personal attack so their defense is to point out the flaws in others. But as so comments have noted, while "Live free or die" has an extreme tone, no one is New Hampshire is out to kill anyone in the name of New Hampshire.
And also it's important to remember that Islam is not about freedom, it's about submission to one particular group's concept of God.
Maybe the New Hampshire motto should be amended: "Live free, or die as a slave of Allah!"
I think Hamas's slogan is LIVE AS A PRISONER OF ALLAH OR WE WILL MAKE YOU DIE.
I like 'The Islamist'. It's an insider's look on things, but perhaps I mainly remember the fun or revealing bits:
"Ninja Girls", the young Muslimas who are induced to cover themselves from head to foot and to the surprise and disappointment of the boys become unapproachable.
In Saudi Arabia always remember to make your wife enter a cab last and exit it as the first.
The young bloods of Syria who are sent off to the Iraqi border with great noise and celebrations by their friends: they are off to kill Americans. Arrived at the border they happily declare their intentions to the border guards who sigh wearily - they have seen it all before - and send them straigh back to mom and dad again. And back to new celebrations and alarum they go: they have shown they are willing.
"Live free or die" is New Hampshire state motto, Being celebrated. Sorry, but sounds extreme to me. Hamas comes to my mind.
................................
This slogan dates from the Revolutionary War. It is a warning to tyrants that many in New Hampshire are willing to die for their freedom.
It is not a threat that if one does not "live free" that he will be killed. In fact, this would be an oxymoron—to threaten a person in such a manner would, in fact, *take away their freedom*.
This is either a deliberate—and ham-fisted—attempt at moral equivalency on "Ed Hussein's" part, or else he really has no idea what this saying means at all.
But then—is it any wonder that a Muslim would understand *nothing* about freedom?
And "Ed Hussein" has not been the first to compare the "Palestinians" trying to destroy Israel to the patriots of revolutionary America—usually, this is intended to present homicidal outfits like Hamas as "freedom fighters".
This is the first time I have seen this false equivalency used to present both Hamas and Americans fighting for their independence as equally "extreme".
Not only did we fail to wage a genocidal war against the English at the time, but I very much doubt Hamas' vision for "Palestine" is that of the civilized state of New Hampshire.
For proof, all you have to do is look at the violent, moribund, oppressive state of Gaza...
Well said as usual, gravenimage. Since my wife and I have had the good fortune to acquire a vacation home in New Hampshire, and to which abode we go to whenever possible because it is so beautiful there (the White Mountains in particular are simply stupendous), what you wrote was all the more meaningful.
Hope you and yours are doing well this New Year. And hopefully it will be another year when more millions in the West come to realize how much of a mortal threat Islamic doctrine is to liberty. Live free or die indeed, in the New Hampshire meaning of the phrase and not the silly Ed Husain's take on it. Take good care, my friend.
As a citizen of New Hampshire, I'd like to point out to Mr. Husain that we have lots of thick, dense woods here in the granite state.
By claiming this, Ed unwittingly concedes that "normal Islam"....as great, proud, magnificent, powerful, and perfect as it's held up to be by Muslims worldwide....could actually be marginalized.
And by a handful of ordinary folk writing books and blogs, no less.
That's telling....for Islam, that is.
Trouble is, with Islam it's "Live enslaves or die." Freedom is a concept utterly foreign to the concept of submission, even if it's submission to Allah.
{^_^}
I just got that in my email box. You beat me to it...
Sounds beautiful, Wellington. I hope you and your wife have many happy times there.
I also wish you a Happy New Year—and share your wishes for the year to come!