| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
There is jihad and there is jihad, you see. There are "illegitimate attacks against peaceful democracies" and then there are "legitimate acts of resistance against illegitimate regimes around the world." In other words, in Jafar's view terrorism is justified against, say, Israel, the Indians in Kashmir, and perhaps the Philippines in Mindanao, the Russians in Chechnya, and maybe even against southern Christians in Sudan. Oh, and let's not forget the American-backed regimes in Iraq and Afghanistan.
This highlights the problem inherent in focusing exclusively on "terrorism" instead of on "jihad" or even on "Islamic radicalism." If the British would declare that they are fighting against those who want to impose Sharia, whether by violent or peaceful means, in Britain and elsewhere, they wouldn't have to deal with these kinds of objections.
And would the entire Islamic world then rise up against Britain -- and America as well? This seems to be the great fear of all the pseudo-conservatives who would rule out of court any discussion of what in Islam needs reforming -- and if such reform is even possible. But there are many Muslim states that depend on the United States for a great deal. Perhaps they could be induced to fight against the Sharia-and-caliphate jihadists within their own countries in order to keep that aid flowing. But no one in Washington seems particularly interested in tying the two together.
From AP, with thanks to Sr. Soph:
LONDON - A prominent British Muslim warned lawmakers Monday that proposals for tough new anti-terror laws could undermine the Muslim community's willingness to cooperate in fighting terror.Abdurahman Jafar, a senior member of the Muslim Council of Britain, expressed concern about the Terror Bill, which was drawn up in the wake of the July attacks on London's transit system.
The bill would extend the maximum 14-day detention for terror suspects without charge to three months, outlaw attending terrorist training camps and make it an offense to glorify or encourage terrorism.
Addressing a meeting of Parliament's joint committee on human rights, Jafar told lawmakers that he feared a "really horrific counter-productive effect" from the bill, partly because of the proposed glorification offense.
He said the measure threatens to merge "the issue of illegitimate attacks against peaceful democracies, with legitimate acts of resistance against illegitimate regimes around the world."
Jafar, who is vice chairman of the legal affairs committee of the Muslim Council of Britain, also voiced concern about the plans to lengthen the detention period for terror suspects who haven't been charged.
He said the legislation risked weakening the wider Muslim community's commitment to fight terrorism in the wake of the July 7 attacks, which killed 52 commuters and four suicide bombers, who were devout Muslims.
The July 7 attacks killed four suicide bombers? What a strange way to put it: as if the suicide bombers were just hanging out at the corner cookstall enjoying a few jellied eels when suddenly the attacks happened.
Posted by Robert at November 1, 2005 6:20 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
If he`s a Sunni does he know that he most probably is on a Shiite hit list. Just as Qaradhawi etc. are.
![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at November 1, 2005 6:32 AM
"... undermine the Muslim community's willingness to cooperate in fighting terror."
WHAT willingness?
jay
Posted by: jay at November 1, 2005 6:35 AM
This is a cautionary advisory: At what point will Muslims begin to apply this same principle to "legitimate attacks against 'illegitimate' governments" in the West" as they see our governments to be "illegitimately" based on man's laws rather than those of Allah?
Posted by: epg at November 1, 2005 6:47 AM
The stupidity of our rulers and the snobbish media elite never ceases to amaze does it.
Just today as we commemorate the "TERRORIST" attacks of July 7th.
As the presenters on Sky,BBC,ITV,CNN use the word "TERRORIST" in their presentation what do we see at the bottom of the screen on that little band of information that keeps the news updated.
The words
hamas/islamic jihad/chechan/kasmiri/phillipino/moslem "MILITANT"
Until this changes don't expect too much help from Russia & India against Iran.
What is that dozy idiot Bush playing at supplying F16's to pakistan ?
Posted by: apostate_islam at November 1, 2005 6:59 AM
just hanging out at the corner cookstall enjoying a few jellied eels
Ouch!!!
It's official; it's in The Guardian There is no reason why the west should set its face against the vision of a reunited Islamic world
The aim of Islamic law, contrary to popular belief, is not punishment by death or amputation of body parts. It is to create a peaceful and just society, with Islamic scholars over centuries citing its core aims: the freedom to practise religion; protection of life; safeguarding intellect; maintaining lineage and individual rights. This could be the basis for an Islamic bill of rights.
And I'm a Dutchman.
at November 1, 2005 7:06 AM
This Senior British Muslim is despicable. Notice how he calls the murdering scum "devout" as contrasted with what, the other British Moslems who were not devout enough to kill with their brothers. The man should be in the Tower. Check his immigration status. He is arguing it is justified to kill civilians, women and children when Islam says so. He wants a law that allows the "devout" Moslems to decide this, not the House of Commons or Lords. He wants "Devout" Moslem sheiks to decide Israel (yes!), the Indians in Kashmir (yes!) the Philippines in Mindanao (yes!) the Russians in Chechnya (yes!) Darfur (yes!) Iraq (yes!) and Afghanistan (yes!). He probably thinks mullahs outside Britian should write the fatwa to which he will probably defer even if he personally does not agree with it. We should do worse to him than criminals do to child perverts as he is advocating child murder.
Posted by: David England at November 1, 2005 7:08 AM
Whilst the Dhimmi New Labour Government allows the MCB to openly support the murder of women, children & non-combatants whilst limiting the debate on Islam for the rest of us they should not be too surprised if the end result is the spectre of Anglo Saxon British Terrorists rising from the shadows to reclaim their nation from Islamofascism.
With no Government or Judiscary or media to protect our civilians, heritage, culture, language & country from this fascist 5th column, civil war within the decade in the UK is almost inevitable.
Just how much more of this appeasement of Islamic Fascism do they think we can swallow?
The clash of civilisations is not an abstract concept to be discussed over coffee in an Islington Bistro - its here now.
Just because Britain has a history of evolution not revolution does not mean we cannot go down that route - & if the alternative to taking the power back from the New Traitors is to surrender to Islamic Fascism who could blame us?.
Posted by: albion at November 1, 2005 7:35 AM
The clash of civilisations is not an abstract concept to be discussed over coffee in an Islington Bistro
That would be the Islington bistro next to the 'corner cookstall' that sells jellied eels to visiting Yorkshiremen?
Actually the bruschetta eaters of Islington all read The Guardian and so believe that the Caliphate is a good idea, that polygamy is an alternative lifestyle and that Sheikh 'stone 'em and flog 'em Qaradawi is just misunderstood.
Posted by: Interested at November 1, 2005 7:45 AM
"new anti-terror laws could undermine the Muslim community's willingness to cooperate in fighting terror."
This statement is in direct contradiction of Sura 8:60 "Against the infidels make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies of Allah..." Taqiyyah, plain and simple. Lying to advance Islam. Or as our old friends the Communists would have said, "the end justifies the means". Islam is spread through terrorism, so how can the Umma be against what the Quran commands?
at November 1, 2005 8:08 AM
Britain is a much more liberal, smaller, and centralized country than the US. The non-Muslim population is disarmed, irreligious, misinformed and demographically stunted. The US population is much larger and much more vigorous: the Islamic rot will take considerably longer to eat away at America’s core. God help the British.
Posted by: have_mercy at November 1, 2005 8:51 AM
Islamic rot will probably never succeed in America. Muslims are a small part of our immigration, and here in the US I suspect their birthrate is not so high; Muslims in the US are generally highly educated. Also, second and third generation Muslims in the US are very moderate compared to their fellows in Europe. I would not be surprised if there was a lot of conversion to Christianity going on. Among the Iranian community I know this is the case.
Perhaps this is the only true way forward: convert them. There are heroic evangelicals active in Muslim countries, albeit at great personal risk. To think - here I am, a Jew lionizing Christian proselytizers. What a world we live in.
Quijybo
Posted by: Quijybo at November 1, 2005 9:07 AM
I am a new reader and find this to be highly informative and interesting.Iwant to continue reading and also contribute
Posted by: rfuller at November 1, 2005 9:09 AM
Quijybo
At this point, I would lionize anyone that can convert Muslims, even Stalin resurrected.
at November 1, 2005 9:14 AM
Welcome, rfuller, and spread the word!
Posted by: Gary at November 1, 2005 9:14 AM
The Palestinians have had few stauncher champions over the years than Christopher Hitchens, who helped Ed Said rebut Joan Peters and Daniel Goldhagen on some points, yet in the aftermath Hitchens condemned all acts of terrorism committed where political alternatives were open to the aggrieved parties, and he included Palestinians as among those who had political alternatives, but had no interest in exercising them. And that's the big central lie behind the argument/rationalization apologists for terrorism like Abdurahman Jafar terrorism make -- that there are no political alternatives available.
Posted by: waterdragon52 at November 1, 2005 9:27 AM
Nothing that Islam represents can be legitimate for the West.
It is a stinking fetid swamp of hatred and stupidity.
It is also their problem. We must not allow confusion by distinctions with no difference
Islam is the problem. Islam is the enemy.And we're paying with blood.
Posted by: dgene at November 1, 2005 10:09 AM
Another thinly veiled threat from the promoters of fascism and prevention of decency police... the "Senior British Muslims..."
Posted by: jsla at November 1, 2005 11:10 AM
the issue of illegitimate attacks against peaceful democracies, with legitimate acts of resistance against illegitimate regimes around the world
What utter, contemptible double-speak. Why on earth is any representative of any official muslim body doing giving evidence before a 'Human Rights' committee, when official muslim bodies and governments the world over have rejected the Universal Declaration of Human Rights?
Its enough to make me want to blow up...a balloon
Posted by: thomas ato at November 1, 2005 11:50 AM
Just because Britain has a history of evolution not revolution does not mean we cannot go down that route Posted by Albion
Evolution, not revolution? Do you not know your own history? Spell Oliver Cromwell here, yea even Guy Fawlkes - who at least gave it a college try.And of course Bonnie Prince Charlie-Culloden- and same guy known as William Wallace.
Maybe it's time to turn the tables, and Guy Fawlke the Muslim enclaves.
the issue of illegitimate attacks against peaceful democracies, with legitimate acts of resistance against illegitimate regimes around the world Sayeth the Muslims
That's a two edged sword, it cuts both ways, all Islamic regimes in the world are illegitmate and thus violence is justified against them.
Whats sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
Let's get this war over and down with, it already started, and it started well before 9-11 or WTC1's attempt.
This Administration, the previous, the media, the businessmen, academia are like ostriches sticking their heads in the sand.. and their approach is reminiscent of the Sindh when the Arabs landed on and then conquered that region (Southern Pakistan and Southern Afghanistan) their rulers and kings foolishly thought that the enemy would play by their rules. (That V.S.Naipaul book, Among the Believers is great). They had no idea that they were confronting a New World Order.
Off topic, but JW'ers should make a note to watch Discovery Times this Sunday, "The Crusades", Crescent and Cross". I expect more dhimmitude and apologia.. I hope that I'm wrong.
Posted by: Nariz at November 1, 2005 1:42 PM
He said the measure threatens to merge "the issue of illegitimate attacks against peaceful democracies, with legitimate acts of resistance against illegitimate regimes around the world."
He says a lot in one sentence...
All regimes are illegitimate if they are not Islamic. The regimes are not 'peaceful' unless they are Islamic, and democracy is out of the question. Islam is at war with the world. He says so right there. You and your infidel run democracies are whats illegitimate. Infidels better get this right...You stand in the way of peace, and Allah is going to have peace in this world, even if he has to kill everyone to get it. Well not everyone, there needs to be a few people left to pray five times a day. Allah is addicted to that and needs a constant fix...but the rest of you are toast. Convert and pay the tax, submit to dhimmitude and pay the tax or die, in which case you can skip paying the tax...
at November 1, 2005 2:09 PM
Damn Duh_swami, I was just going to write what you wrote!
We should play in a band together!
Anyway: We have the same here in Australia: The Imam's and the Muftis are telling the government not to make laws against terrorism since it incites more terrorism.
Makes sense? The criminals are telling the government: 'make laws against crime and criminals will commit more crimes and take action against you-' and while I am typing this I am watching CNN in my beautiful hotel in Portofino/Italy, and they are telling me that French Muslims are 'upset' with Szarkosys 'tough' laws:
I guess we should let 'em slash and burn to their hearts delight...After all it's their culture, they have done it successfully for 1400 years, why argue with success...?
Posted by: sheik yer'mami at November 1, 2005 3:24 PM
52 unarmed civilians were murdered by four suicide bombers.
Enough said. Nothing more needs to be said.
Muslims are apparently not victims and therfore any claim to injustice is irrelevant. Orthodox muslims are detonating weaponry upon an unarmed and non-militant population owrldwide. Not one arguement justifies the murder of the innocent lives that have been destroyed.
Either face the laws of civil peace NOW and adapt immigrant muslim culture to said peace established by neccessity of the host country....or face the law of brute force survival LATER.
Posted by: Quantum Infidel at November 1, 2005 3:42 PM
Fascinating article by a British psychologist who has interviewed jailed Muslim extremists. It's a rather long read but worth every insightful word.
Below, he effectively links the disaffection of Muslim youth in the West with our own culture of victimization...spoon-fed us by the Left in the media, our universities and our political class.
One wonders though, if racial discrimination is the prob, why is the unemployment rate of young British Hindus lower than that of whites, even though Hindus are often mistaken for Muslims? The BBC isn't interested in finding out.
Here's the good Dr, discussing the reflexive accusation of discrimination by Western Muslims as they grapple with their persistant economic under-performance...
"In coming to this conclusion, young Muslims would only be adopting the logic that has driven Western social policy for so long: that any difference in economic and social outcome between groups is the result of social injustice and adverse discrimination. The premises of multiculturalism don’t even permit asking whether reasons internal to the groups themselves might account for differences in outcomes.
"The BBC peddles this sociological view consistently..."
The end-game here folks is that the Western Left is encouraging Muslim disaffection by propagating the following fallacious equation: discrimination = under-performance = disaffection. When disaffection results in jihad, it is then society's fault.
Muslims then justify their terrorism based on Leftist social analysis. No blame is laid on Muslim cultural traditions that hamper integration and education. No blame is laid on the exclusion of Muslim woman from economic life. No blame is laid on Islamic theology. The Left and Islam, in perfect sychronicity.
Read it all....
http://www.city-journal.org/html/15_4_suicide_bombers.html
at November 1, 2005 4:15 PM
Anything by Theodore Dalrymple (AKA Anthony Daniels) is worth a read. Some of his best work (based partly on articles for The Spectator) is collected in an anthology, 'Life at the Bottom'.
He is a ruthless debunker of multiculturalism and writes like an angel.
Posted by: Interested at November 1, 2005 4:28 PM
This puke is warning us? Get real.
Posted by: Havoc at November 1, 2005 6:00 PM
Hi, I'm Asian and a newbie on this board, but I feel a lot of outrage at what the Islamists are getting away with.
I feel it's time for to coin another new catchphrase, to spread its use far and wide across the political lexicon. We've already heard about 'Dhimmitude' and the problems it brings. Now we need to look at the related phenomenon of the Ummahgrant and Ummahgration.
For quite some time, this ugly new breed of immigrant has been emerging, who hops into a land and starts pushily demanding that it revolve around him:
http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/10/30/news/islam2.php
This breed of immigrant is completely oblivious to any responsability towards adapting to the needs of the new land that was gracious enough to let him in. Instead of asking what he can do for his newly-adopted land, he quickly demands what the locals can do for him.
I call this the phenomenon of 'Hotel Nation' -- hop into a country like checking into a hotel, and then loudly order the staff to cater to you, like a master hollering at his servants. Note that such loudmouths would never tolerate such behavior occurring back in their own lands of origin. But that hypocrisy is totally lost upon them, as they imperiously clamour for everyone to toe their line.
It's time for good immigrants to distance themselves from and criticize this ugly, haughty behavior so this ugly usurpation can be checked.
Ummahgration must be stopped! Just my opinion, but I'm damn firm on it.
Posted by: sanman at November 1, 2005 6:51 PM
Cornelius raises interesting questions about the origin of Islamic pathology in genteel society. What creates the dysfunction, nihilism and death. I believe it is tied up in the lack of family structure. Why do people who adopt Islam demonstrate severe psycholotic and pyschological problems? Moslem children lack legitimacy and self worth. Girls are worthless. And any boy not of the first parent and first in birthline is worthless. What kind of brotherly relationship does Osama have being one of 37 children? If his mother was a worthless whore, what does that make him? Does the family structure of Islamic adherents cause problems? Mohammed is the child of which wife. Ahmed is the child of which concubine. People of low self esteem seek death and martrydom. Where are all these Islamic volunteers coming from? What causes the Islamic death wish? "We love death." The King of Saudi Arabia or the Saudi succession scheme illustrates my point. Ibn Saud fathered 44 sons by 17 different wives. By the time he died in 1953, 35 of them were still alive. This number had been reduced to 24 by the summer of 2000.
As each brother dies, the next oldest brother of the 24 living brothers takes over. It does not matter what mother bore him. It does matter that the sibbling outlive the elder sibbling if the younger sibbling ever desires to be king. This must have encouraged unbelievable intrigues through the ages. If I am #2 apparent do I conspire with 7 11 15 (we are each of the same mother) to gang up or kill 1 3 4 5 or 6. How does this affect my relationship with other people. My point is no one discusses the harms of polygamy on the esteem of Moslem children. Perhaps this explains why the anti- social behavior of Moslems transcends race, country, national origin or ethnicity. Islam also offers a fresh start to any infidel social deviant who wants an immediate license to rape, pillage and plunder where he hails from.
at November 2, 2005 12:17 AM
Him / Her, lecturing me on my countries history?
Now that is funny.
Still, it was nice to read a post where he / she did not go down their usual route of promoting failed leftist politics.
Posted by: albion at November 2, 2005 4:18 AM
Ummahgrant and Ummahgration.
Nice one, Sanman. Hope you keep posting here.
at November 2, 2005 4:55 AM
Ummahgrant and Ummahgration.
Welcome Sanman
Nice new terms. I will use them at every appropriate juncture.
Cheers
Albion
at November 2, 2005 5:00 AM
Welcome Sanman.
Posted by: Daffersd at November 2, 2005 5:50 AM
Welcome Sanman. I'm of immigrant stock too and feel outraged at the continuous hand-biting openly encouraged by the Islingtonians and Guardianistas. Everyone knows that the Chinese and Indian Hindus and many other immigrants have excelled in British society yet there are hardly any articles about that in Al Guardianistan. The fact that Muslims don't do well says more about them than their imagined grievances. Al Graun has certainly excelled in stupidity over the past couple of weeks, first by printing an article by Maddie Bunting going all dewy eyed over that rancid old misogynist and homophobe Qaradawi and then publishing an article that says the Caliphate is right on. I expect the chattering classes will sleep soundly in their beds now.
The failed leftist immigration policies of successive Governments regarding North Africa in France are now coming home to roost with the Muslim insurgency (there's no other word for it) in Paris. The UK has seen similar riots in Birmingham. Sarkozy the Interior Minister merely attempted to crack down on the lawless young unemployed Muslim thugs who terrorise those suburbs. Of course, we're hearing all the usual crap from the leftist media about "disaffected young Muslims." I wonder why we never hear similar phrases about other immigrant communities? Maybe because they're all working their socks off and taking advantage of everything that's on offer in Britain. I seem to remember a phrase from a long dead and mocked politician that is coming back to haunt everyone now - "Rivers of blood."
Posted by: londongirl at November 2, 2005 1:59 PM
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)