Moderate toward Muslims maybe.

The Koran
15 matches.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Cow
[2.62] Surely those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians, whoever believes in Allah and the Last day and does good, they shall have their reward from their Lord, and there is no fear for them, nor shall they grieve.
[2.111] And they say: None shall enter the garden (or paradise) except he who is a Jew or a Christian. These are their vain desires. Say: Bring your proof if you are truthful.
[2.113] And the Jews say: The Christians do not follow anything (good) and the Christians say: The Jews do not follow anything (good) while they recite the (same) Book. Even thus say those who have no knowledge, like to what they say; so Allah shall judge between them on the day of resurrection in what they differ.
[2.120] And the Jews will not be pleased with you, nor the Christians until you follow their religion. Say: Surely Allah's guidance, that is the (true) guidance. And if you follow their desires after the knowledge that has come to you, you shall have no guardian from Allah, nor any helper.
[2.135] And they say: Be Jews or Christians, you will be on the right course. Say: Nay! (we follow) the religion of Ibrahim, the Hanif, and he was not one of the polytheists.
[2.140] Nay! do you say that Ibrahim and Ismail and Yaqoub and the tribes were Jews or Christians? Say: Are you better knowing or Allah? And who is more unjust than he who conceals a testimony that he has from Allah? And Allah is not at all heedless of what you do.
The Family of Imran
[3.67] Ibrahim was not a Jew nor a Christian but he was (an) upright (man), a Muslim, and he was not one of the polytheists.
The Dinner Table
[5.14] And with those who say, We are Christians, We made a covenant, but they neglected a portion of what they were reminded of, therefore We excited among them enmity and hatred to the day of resurrection; and Allah will inform them of what they did.
[5.18] And the Jews and the Christians say: We are the sons of Allah and His beloved ones. Say: Why does He then chastise you for your faults? Nay, you are mortals from among those whom He has created, He forgives whom He pleases and chastises whom He pleases; and Allah's is the kingdom of the heavens and the earth and what is between them, and to Him is the eventual coming.
[5.51] O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.
[5.69] Surely those who believe and those who are Jews and the Sabians and the Christians whoever believes in Allah and the last day and does good-- they shall have no fear nor shall they grieve.
[5.82] Certainly you will find the most violent of people in enmity for those who believe (to be) the Jews and those who are polytheists, and you will certainly find the nearest in friendship to those who believe (to be) those who say: We are Christians; this is because there are priests and monks among them and because they do not behave proudly.
The Immunity
[9.30] And the Jews say: Uzair is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!
The Pilgrimage
[22.17] Surely those who believe and those who are Jews and the Sabeans and the Christians and the Magians and those who associate (others with Allah)-- surely Allah will decide between them on the day of resurrection; surely Allah is a witness over all things.

Posted by: Founding Forefather at August 15, 2005 5:26 PM

I agree with Robert. If I were truly a moderate muslim, I'm sure I would welcome a person like Robert Spenser who has the guts to challenge the jehadists within my faith. And I know I would be really furiously against the Islam apologists who allow the Bin Ladens and the Zarqawis to continue to hijack my religion.

Posted by: Razdan at August 15, 2005 7:01 PM

"...and that Muslims .must formulate a theoretical and theological basis for lasting peaceful coexistence with non-Muslims, since such a basis does not exist within traditional Islamic theology."

"I am all for forming a united front with decent Muslims who hold rational and humane values."

If a basis for peaceful coexistence with non-Moslems does not exist within "traditional" Islamic theology, then I suppose in order to form a united front with "decent Muslims who hold rational and humane values" you will have to look for such among those Moslems who have given up traditional Islamic theology.

In other words, we can peacefully coexist with (some of) them only to the extent they give up fundamentalist, traditional Islam. (As for the rest, well...) And is THAT not the very soul of Islam? That makes Islam itself the problem. And if they give up "traditional" Islam, are they still then Moslems? And how many Moslems, realistically, will respond to such a prospect?

Posted by: Arkansas Bushwhacker at August 15, 2005 7:10 PM

The very phrase "moderate Muslim" shows us what we all realize about Islam, even if we choose not to express it to others or even to recognize it ourselves. For a "moderate Muslim" is someone who is not too much of a believer, who may be largely unobservant, who may choose to ignore a large part of what the Qur'an, Hadith, and the example of Muhammad in the Sira all teach. In other words, a "moderate Muslim" is one who takes his Islam but only "in moderation." Ideally, from the viewpoint of Infidels, is that "moderate Muslim" who takes such a low dose of the belief-system that he becomes what I like to call the "Muslim-for-identification-purposes-only" Muslim.

What does this tell us? It tells us that Islam itself is a menace and a threat. For if the "moderate Muslim" -- the one we keep telling ourselves is the good kind, the kind we wish to encourage, the kind we can work with, the kind we can trust to do battle against "immoderate" Muslims -- then we are in fact recognizing that there is something terribly wrong with Islam itself. We can only have hope, if we have any hope at all, in those who do not take the teachings of Islam too seriously, too much to heart. It is those who fully accept the teachings of Islam, and are not merely going through the motions out of filial piety or some vague sense of tradition, who are the greatest danger.

But the notion of "moderate" Muslims is too easily invoked and relied upon. In the archives at JW one can find "Ten Things to Think About When Thinking About Moderate Muslims." And among the points made in that piece is that those who through their failure to describe what Islam teaches, their own attempts to deflect understanding and knowledge of Islam through the exercise of Taqiyya-and-Tu-Quoque, are not "moderates" in any helpful sense, for they are simply continuing to mislead unwary Infidels. And what is worse, they are more effective at it, smoother at it, than the wild-eyed attendees of the Finsbury Mosque. Omar Bakri Mohammed is not nearly the threat that the smooth Tariq Ramadan is to Infidel understanding of Islam.

A true "moderate" must be defined as a Muslim who does not mislead in any way aobut Islam. He may be uncomfortable about telling the full truth but he should not lie about what Qur'an, Hadith, and Sira teach, and how those teachings are accepted by a great many, the overwhelming majority, of Muslims. He must not deny the reality of the example of Muhammad, and what that example of uswa hasana, the Model for All Time, means for Muslmis -- and more importantly, for non-Muslims. He must not pretend that the many Jihad verses in the Qur'an do not exist, or that they can be interpreted away, or that the doctrine of abrogation is not accepted. He must not confuse Infidels by quoting Hadith that may be pleasing, but are also deemed inauthentic, and he must not ignore those Hadith deemed authentic. He must not selectively quote, with careful ellipses, certain verses in the Qur'an, or mislead as to the meaning of verses which, on first reading, might seem unexceptional.

Only those who admit that there is something terribly menacing about Islam, and that in order for Muslims to be accepted, or even tolerated, in the Lands of the Infidels, they will have to admit that there is something wrong both in the teachings of Islam, and in the treatment, in time and space, of non-Muslims by Muslims who conquered their lands, and procedded to islamize, and in many cases as well to arabize, those lands, and to force those who did not convert to endure the permanent status of degradation, humiliation, and physical insecurity that all dhimmis, from Spain to East Asia, found was their common and immutable lot.

How many Muslims will qualify as "moderates" according to the minimal criteria offered above?

Very few.

Posted by: Hugh at August 15, 2005 7:31 PM

I will pose this again.

Let us consider the situation that all muslims at present living in the West, accepted the call to clean their communities of extremism. They even went further and made the changes in their teachings of the koran and the jihad. Such an outcome would no doubt come as a relief to many on this site. But I counter, that all such changes were being done merely to protect the ummah while it grows at ever increasing pace in the West. Once a near majority is achieved, that future generation of muslims will simply revoke any changes and return to the traditions of the koran. They will even praise this generation of muslims for having done what was necessary to protect islam.

The Jihadis and the moderates operate in concert, each to advance islam in a manner that is best suited. No formal understanding is required - it is understood, that as the Jihadis have made the ultimate sacrifice, the living "moderates" must make full use of that sacrifice. It is also this that sustains the Jihadis, as they go out in their final journey to harvest Infidel lives.

Posted by: DP111 at August 15, 2005 7:41 PM

"But I counter, that all such changes were being done merely to protect the ummah while it grows at ever increasing pace in the West. Once a near majority is achieved, that future generation of muslims will simply revoke any changes and return to the traditions of the koran. They will even praise this generation of muslims for having done what was necessary to protect islam."

"The Jihadis and the moderates operate in concert, each to advance islam in a manner that is best suited. No formal understanding is required - it is understood, that as the Jihadis have made the ultimate sacrifice, the living "moderates" must make full use of that sacrifice."

And it is this taqiyya, or "holy hypocrisy" (deception of the infidel) that makes it impossible to trust so called "moderate" Moslems.
How can we ever believe ANYTHING they say to us?

Posted by: Arkansas Bushwhacker at August 15, 2005 7:52 PM

... self-proclaimed "moderate muslims" are anything but! How many times have we seen in here on JW/DW that a troll comes on the scene, calls himself not only 'moderate' but also 'reasonable', only to write in the next sentence that 9/11 was an "inside job" or that the burkha is 'protecting women' and the Sharia is far superior to Democracy?

No. There are NO moderates.

Apostates are moderates. As long as they call themselves "Muslim" and hold such ideas as above described they are anything but 'moderate'. They are at best part of the fifth column, and at worst members of Al Queda.

Posted by: Terminator at August 15, 2005 8:15 PM

Terminator:

"Apostates are moderates. As long as they call themselves "Muslim" and hold such ideas as above described they are anything but 'moderate'. They are at best part of the fifth column, and at worst members of Al Queda."

This was my point in the above posts, but you said it a lot better and clearer!

Posted by: Arkansas Bushwhacker at August 15, 2005 8:41 PM

Robert Spencer said:
I am all for forming a united front with decent Muslims who hold rational and humane values. I do not think that ignoring or denying the elements of Islam that give rise to violence and terror will help do this -- particularly in light of the well-established fact that many self-proclaimed moderate Muslims are actually practicing the deception of the enemy that the Muslim prophet Muhammad called for during wartime.

And that, Mr Spencer is exactly why You should be in the forefront of this discussion. Recognition and Renunciation of specific elements of Islam is necessary to win this War on Islamofascism, as well as concrete action. Denial of these facts and escape from the appropriate shame will only provide a short term false sense of security.

Posted by: Trupolitik at August 15, 2005 11:04 PM

A moderate Muslim is a Muslim that passes the beheading-sword to his friend, rather than wielding it himself.

Posted by: St Dunstan at August 16, 2005 5:37 AM

A moderate Muslim is one that passes the beheading-sword to his friend, rather than wielding it himself.

Posted by: St Dunstan at August 16, 2005 5:38 AM

There are no moderate ants in a nest, there are no moderate hornets in a hive, and there are no moderate muslims in a mosque...

Posted by: duh_swami at August 16, 2005 8:15 AM

I have thought about this example before. Imagine you are a "devout" Christian. Not only do you go to Church every Sunday, you stay to teach children's classes, along with prayer meetings twice a week, and active in all Church activities.

How would you like being called a "moderate" Christian? It would imply that your faith is weak, like skim milk, tasteless and non-nourishing.

I can't help believe that is what muslims really hear when we compliment them for being "moderate muslims". Not much of a compliment, from their perspective.

So, I agree with the above writers that the only proud and "moderate" muslim is an apostate.

Posted by: VoiceOfSkippy at August 16, 2005 8:33 AM

http://memritv.org/search.asp?ACT=S9&P1=793#

This is a moderate Muslim if ever I have seen one, but he is a rare thing indeed. What a powerful speach and the way it was said to, with passion.

Posted by: Daffersd at August 16, 2005 9:04 AM

"This is a moderate Muslim if ever I have seen one, but he is a rare thing indeed. What a powerful speach and the way it was said to, with passion."
--- from Daffersd's posting immediately above

Iyat Jamal al-Din may be a citizen of Iraq, but his name, his sect, his outlook, and the contents of his speech make one think he is of Persian lineage. His fury at "Arab" Islam is noticeable. One wonders if he has come as close to being an apostate as he can, without declaring himself one, and that he chooses to blame much of the woe brought by Islam not on Islam itself (he still can't do that) but on the Arabness associated with it, or how the Arabs have managed to use it as a vehicle for arabization. That theme runs throughout his speech.

I agree that Iyat Jamal al-Din's speech is remarkable. But what I would like to draw attention to is the resentment it expresses not only against Islam but for "Arab" Islam. This theme, by the way, is also to be found in Iran today, expressed by those who are disenchanted with the Islamic Republic of Iran, a disenchantment that extends to Islam itself (not unnaturally), and that can find expression in blame put on "the Arabs" for what "they have done to Islam."

The resentment of non-Arab Muslims that is directed at Arabs, and which in some cases is merely resentment deflected from Islam itself (as if it is only "Arab Islam" that is the problem), should be exploited by Infidel governments.

But can it be? Consider Radio Sawa and the Al Hurra television channels, both supposedly beaming to the Arab world. Both are staffed by Arabs, mostly Muslims. Many are thoroughly Westernized -- but not thoroughly Westernized enough to want to be part of any campaign to divide, demoralize, throw into disarray, the forces of Islam. Those who think that they can best win over "Arab minds" by offering slightly more chaste versions of Britney Spears and what is called "Pop Culture" when what is really needed is not this crap, which represents the worst in American and Western life, but rather the "Mom & Pop Culture" of delightfully humdrum existence, which education helps to make more entertaining for oneself and makes oneself more entertaining to others. It would be nice to have programs on the American Constitution, on the Bill of Rights, or on the "due process" clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and how it incorporates rights guaranteed by the First Amendment. It would be good to have programs on the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses, on painters and sculptors (yes, ignore the Muslim ban on such things), on musicians, and on the developments in modern science. It would be could to offer a platform for those non-Muslim Arabs who wish to criticize "arabization," to Berbers and to Kurds and to the odd Malay or Indonesian intellectual deploring the arabization that islamization seems always to bring with it. It would be could to offer, on Radio Sawa and on Al Hurra, the views of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Ibn Warraq, Ali Sina, Irfan Khawaja, and others. It would be could to be forthright about the very idea of the "Arab world" and how it gives such short shrift to all the many non-Arab, and even non-Muslim, indigenous inhabitants of North Africa and the Middle East -- and that includes the Jews now in-gathered into Israel.

But the kind of people now in charge of "explaining" us and "justifying" us to the Arabs and Muslims are not the ones to do it. The very idea that the American government needs to "explain itself" or "win over the Muslim hearts and minds" is both absurd and self-defeating. It plays into the idea that it is we who have something to explain, and allows Muslims to act aggrieved, to insist that they need to be won over -- a folie a deux as foreign policy. It is they who need to explain, to us, to other Infidels around the world, and to themselves, what they intend to do about what is contained in Qur'an, Hadith, and Sira. It is they who have to assure us that there is some way for Muslims, who do not believe in pluralism, who have been instructed that "war is deception" by Muhammad himself, who have given every sign of being well-versed in taqiyya and kitman to deny what Islam teaches or what they themselves belief, it is they who owe their sole allegiance to the umma al-islamiyya and not to Infidels in the same nation-state, who should be doing the explaining.

We need not "reach out," as the awful phrase has it, to "the Muslim world," and certainly not by offering the hip-hop and pop dregs of the Western world. That is putting the worst face on ourselves.

No, the very idea that there is such a need is both absurd, and self-defeating. It plays to the Arab and Muslim pride, assumes that it is we who need to do the explaining, when Muslims and Arabs should be constantly reminded that it is they, and their belief-system, that is now under scrutiny, and it is those who believe that the world is divided uncrompisingly between Believer and Infidel, and between dar al-Islam and dar al-Harb.

Let them keep telling us why we should not worry about what is in their texts and their minds, their attitudes, their atmospherics. Let them tell us what they intend to do about the impulse to spread Islam until it covers the globe, about Jihad, about the whipping up of hatred toward this or that group of Infidels. No, it is they who have 1350 years to explain, or to apologize for.

We're all ears.

Posted by: Hugh at August 16, 2005 11:15 AM

The very idea that the American government needs to "explain itself" or "win over the Muslim hearts and minds" is both absurd and self-defeating. It plays into the idea that it is we who have something to explain, and allows Muslims to act aggrieved, to insist that they need to be won over -- a folie a deux as foreign policy. It is they who need to explain, to us, to other Infidels around the world, and to themselves, what they intend to do about what is contained in Qur'an, Hadith, and Sira.

Hugh, I hope someone from the US State Department is reading this. You are so absolutely right! I've always been amazed at the gall of muslims in acting always as an aggrieved party no matter which host country they are at... and yet, we all know how terribly non-muslims are treated in Islamic countries. I mean how shameless can they be!

Posted by: Razdan at August 16, 2005 4:41 PM

Moderate moslems CHEER from the sidelines. Moderate moslems keep 'MUM' about what they have seen or what they know about real or suspected murderers.
Moderate moslems are the 'WINDOW DRESSING'for the gutless, merciless. murdering pagan terrorists.
Yet they and the craven gutless murderers are all ONE. They are all pagan worshippers of hudna, the moon god of mecca.
They ALL want to bring down every religion and have death loving,lying, deceitful islam the only religion. numbat

Posted by: numbat at August 17, 2005 12:56 AM