Muslim writer: "Islamophobia actually doesn't exist at all...some of our Islamic centres created the term"

''As Muslims we should identify ourselves with the culture and land we associate with. Islam also teaches this but unfortunately **Islam's true liberal teachings** (my emphasis:Jan) are not being told to us by our traditional Islamic organizations in the West that are in the hands of mainly Islamists''

Oh, please. Methinks this is merely a more clever attempt at fooling the unbelievers. After all, if ''more than 90% of muslims don't go to mosque'', we've got nothing to worry about, have we ?

... unfortunately Islam's true liberal teachings are not being told to us by our traditional Islamic organizations in the West that are in the hands of mainly Islamists.

And what true liberal teachings might those be, and how do they square with the doctrine of abrogation which gives primacy to the sura (at-Tawbah, No. 9) containing the infamous "Verse of the Sword" (9:5) as well as the mandate (9:29) to fight non-Muslims until they "feel themselves subdued?"

Huffingtn Post's readership may be a bunch of chumps, but Jihad Watch's are not.

"Islam's true liberal teachings are not being told to us"

There's nothing preventing any Muslim from reading the holy texts rather than waiting to be 'told'. Kitman, anyone?

"Similarly Niqab, armed Jihad, alienation and segregation are not endorsed by original version and modern interpretations of Islam but sharia-bound Islamists use them in order to further their agenda"

Mhhh..Taqiyya in action. Mr. Gora who said this:
"War is deceit". (it's a No-Brainer)
Anyway by sharia-bound Islamists does he simply mean (true) Muslims? Does he mean followers of the true version of the Koran?

The Muslim Brotherhood, CAIR and Islamists in general, have gotten a lot of mileage out of the term. If you interject it often enough, Islamophobia, becomes real. We can thank a gullible liberal society, for their cooperation, in making the term a household word.

The Muslim Brotherhood, CAIR and Islamists in general, have gotten a lot of mileage out of the term. If you interject it often enough, Islamophobia, becomes real. We can thank a gullible liberal society, for their cooperation, in making the term a household word.

The reason HuffPo likes this Muslim writer, Gora, is because he is representing and spinning the Good Cop line in a seemingly more convincing way.

There are two types of Good Cop: the CAIR type, who denies there is any bad jihad and who claims Islamophobia is the real problem. Perhaps some PC MCs, like some at HuffPo, are beginning to feel a little itchy about such counter-factual fantasy.

To help out, however, there is the cleverer, slier type of Good Cop, who gives us a little more of his fishing line by admitting there are "some problems" but that, as Gora says with such a glibly sweeping stroke of his broad brush:

"...the fact that over 90 per cent of Muslims are not associated with any Islamic organisation or mosque and visit it no more than once or twice a year. That alone should make America skeptical of Islamist groups like CAIR, ISNA, ICNA and MSA."

Ah, we can breathe a sigh of relief again; an intelligent Muslim concerned about the problems of Islam has reassured us that the vast majority of Muslims are not problematic, and that it's only a Tiny Minority of Extremists. (Never mind that Gora is likely consanguineous with that supposedly tiny minority.)

It's almost as though the increasingly preposterous Good Cop/Bad Cop ploy is beginning to crack under the strain of its untenability; and so now we have one set of Good Cops, slightly more plausible-seeming like Gora, acting as the Good Cops in contrast to the other Good Cops like CAIR. Ingenious!

The PC MCs at HuffPo are gullible enough to get hooked by this bait; I would hope, though, that no Jihad Watch regulars (let alone anyone who thinks of themselves as being in the Counter-Jihad) are.

T.A.Gora reads like Ed Husain, author of 'The Islamist'.
Unconvincing.

Posted on HP:

The link in this article to the report by Bagby is a NY Times article where Bagby is cited. That said there's a quote regarding the population of Muslims: "Of an estimated four million to six million Muslims in the United States..."

This figure is WRONG. I guess what they've done is cite the hyper-inflated statistic from CAIR or some other Islamophobia lobby. Who knows? Google "Hate Crime Stats Deflate 'Islamophobia' Myth" by David J. Rusin. Here's an exerpt:

As for Muslims, whose population estimates have a convoluted history, reputable recent numbers have been provided by the Pew Research Center (2.75 million in 2011) and the Association of Statisticians of American Religious Bodies (2.6 million in 2010; full data extractable here), which agree on the current size and growth rate (around 100,000 per year). The 2002–11 average is roughly 2.3 million Muslims."

Here's the link: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/337417/hate-crime-stats-deflate-islamophobia-myth-david-j-rusin?pg=2

"Posted on HP"

What I should've done is a qualifier: If it passes the HP censors.

Whatever our feelings on Muslims, a positive future belongs to people like this who reject hard-line Islam (or how else do you think this will play out?). In time, maybe they will reject it altogether. Christianity was full of crazy vengeful fundamentalists a while ago, and now it's down to a few deniers of evolution and gay priests who use the Mafia-like power of the church to get away with sodomizing choirboys. All religion is deceit, but Islam is pure evil. Waging war on it only gives the hardliners something to fight against. Opposition has to come from within. We are just helpless observers - the best we can do is to be informed and to warn.

David - I'm sorry that you are incapable of objective thought, and can't see the parallels in your own religion. Go back a few decades, and you have some pretty hefty Christian oppression (I know - I grew up in it). Go back a few centuries, and you have a similar situation to current Islam. Torture, death for apostasy, ethnic cleansing by one sub-group against another... Hardly taking tea with the vicar, was it?

Europe has slowly moved away from the church, with even the Irish now leaving in droves thanks to the extensive level of child abuse that was systematically covered up by church leaders who held their own interests above those of innocent children. Very brave of you to defend it though. The US seems to be rather behind in the still high level of church attendance, although numbers are dwindling even here. The really bizarre thing in the US is that the most outspoken Christians also seem to be the most right-wing, and the loudest advocates of gun rights. As you have probably gathered, I am not a Christian, but even I can see that those beliefs are hardly in line with the teachings of Jesus.

From where I stand, as a devout atheist, all religions are simply groups or individuals who have exploited the need for answers to three fundamental questions - "How did I get here?"; "What happens after I die?"; and "Isn't there something I'm supposed to be doing in the meantime?" The answer is simply "Nobody knows", but most humans can't cope with that, and would rather take an off-the-peg solution that gives an imperfect answer, and lets them off the hook for having to figure it out for themselves. Everyone knows it's all bull-droppings, but they go along with it because they can't handle the bleakness of reality. That's why it's referred to as 'the suppression of disbelief'. And people get real angry in defense of that self-applied denial (let me know if I've lost you by this stage). Heck, they'll even deny scientific knowledge to make the stories in their little book fit. The more imperfect the solution, the greater the denial, and the greater the oppression has to be to keep people in line. That's why the Catholic Church holds it members in permanent blackmail, and, more to the immediate point, why Muslims are killed if they leave their faith. Whether or not Jesus was the son of God, he was at least a good guy who preached about being nice to one another, and had an amazing ability to make huge numbers of very tiny fish sandwiches. Making folk believe that God chose to speak through a violent sadistic womanizing pedophile bandit requires a little more persuasion.

If a bunch of Christians want to go to church every Sunday, and sing songs about how great their personal interpretation of God is, that's fine. They're only a danger to others on the road, but they're easy to spot - they the only ones driving below the speed limit. I don't like the way that American Christians just assume everyone else thinks the way they do. I have much more of an issue with people that want to kill everyone who doesn't. But unfortunately, this evil ideology has passed itself off as a religion, and thanks to political correctness, we're not allowed to mess with people's beliefs, no matter how crazy.

So how would you like to resolve the situation - after all, there are a few billion of them? If you're an American Evangelist (just guessing from your anger level), then I'm also guessing your solution has something to do with guns. Really? How is that going to play out? On the other hand, there are a large number of people who have been forced to be and remain Muslim, often on pain of death, who would gladly reject the whole caboodle if they had a chance. If there really are 90% of them in that boat, that's the best news possible. Even with 51%, we're onto a winner, but those people need to be supported and encouraged, because the voice of moderation is the least heard. But it did exist in Egypt, and was the initial cause of the uprising until the Islamic Mafia hijacked it. Ditto for Iran three decades earlier, and many other countries in the Middle East still going through the process.

Our greatest hope is that those people start to reject the oppression of their religion just as people did under Christianity. You and your big gun aren't going to achieve Jack Schmidt.