| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Robert Spencer | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog |  |
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
Discussing how to deal with the reality of what is in Islamic teaching, and how Muslims themselves deal with this reality, in FrontPage this morning (news links in the original):
Since I began work on my new book The Truth About Muhammad, I have often been asked whether I really think it will do any good to discuss the actions of Muhammad that jihadists use to justify violence. Doesn’t that alienate moderate Muslims? I have responded that actually no Islamic reform can possibly take place without an acknowledgment that there are elements of the Qur’an and the example of Muhammad that need searching reevaluation: how can reformers succeed if no one admits that anything needs any reforming?At the same time, however, Islamic reformers have a difficult road. They are often targeted as apostates by jihadists, and often physically threatened. Farzana Hassan Shahid, the new president of the Muslim Canadian Congress (MCC), is the latest victim of this phenomenon. After her liberal views on many Islamic hot-button issues became known, she began receiving death threats from Muslim hardliners who considered her positions evidence of her falling away from Islam. One called her the “younger sister of Satan.” Another accosted her husband at an Ontario mosque and demanded he “control his wife.”
Consequently, Farzana Hassan Shahid explained, “there is an underlying fear all the time...that uneasy feeling is part of my daily life. I have been declared an apostate twice, for opposing the Sharia [Islamic law]. We have asked [Ontario Attorney General] Michael Bryant to include or acknowledge accusation of blasphemy and apostasy into the existing hate laws so the public and legal frame work is sensitized to this issue.”Hassan Shahid is not the first MCC official to be targeted by jihadists. Up until recently, Tarek Fatah was the MCC’s communications director. But in August he abruptly resigned from his position, as well as from the group’s board, severing all ties with the organization, although he had been one of its founders.
Fatah had excellent reasons to want to get out of the limelight. He had long been one of the most high-profile Muslim spokesmen in Canada: he was host of Muslim Chronicle, a current affairs TV-show focusing on Muslims in Canada. And as communications director of the Muslim Canadian Congress, he never shied away from controversy, endorsing positions on homosexual rights and other issues that deviated from Islamic orthodoxy – positions that Hassan Shahid has now echoed. Fatah even opposed the 2005 campaign to introduce arbitration courts based on Islamic law into Canada.
All that took courage. But instead of receiving congratulations from the Canadian Muslim community at large, Fatah became the target of an email campaign initiated by a Muslim student group, the Canadian Islamic Congress (CIC). The CIC claimed that Fatah didn’t represent the majority of Canadian Muslims. Fatah commented: “This is as close as one can gets to issuing a death threat, as it places me as an apostate and blasphemer.”
And Fatah, like Hassan Shahid, has received outright death threats. He told the Toronto Police that he has been receiving death threats since 2003, but lately they’re grown in number. And they’re credible enough in content to move him to resign and duck out of sight.
Voices of moderation or reform within Islamic communities are at a distinct disadvantage because jihadists can so effectively use the Qur’an and Sunnah against them to lend credence to their charges of apostasy. Also, all the schools of Islamic law mandate that an apostate male must be killed -- a command rooted in the teachings of Muhammad, who said, “If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him’” (Bukhari 4.52.260). Thus a death threat can become an act of piety.
It is bitterly ironic that Western non-Muslim observers who know little or nothing of Islam assume that voices of liberalism and reform are the dominant mainstream within Islamic communities in the West and elsewhere, when the reality is that people like Hassan Shahid and Fatah are, despite their popularity among Westerners who like to pride themselves on their “tolerance,” only marginally influential among Muslims -- and are, above all, hunted.
Muslim reformers deserve all the support we can give them. But we should stop deluding ourselves into thinking they’re the majority. And above all, government and law enforcement officials should stop building policy on the assumption that people like Farzana Hassan Shahid and Tarek Fatah are the majority.
Posted by Robert at October 17, 2006 3:43 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
Robert - a sign of hope.
In the good ol' USA, I know several muslim families who have summarily decided that they feel they preserve their traditions, but are clue-free by-and-large as to the content of the Quran and such.
They are apostate by any Islamic definition - yet they are happy and peceful (and possibly the undercurrent of reform that Islam needs to save itself from hellfire ... at least the missiles named so)
![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at October 17, 2006 4:11 AM
With the new "reawakening" of Islam, the radical elements are relying on the Koran and the example of Mohammad more than ever to justify the final goal of Sura 8:38 and the softening of the scriptures by the moderates cannot be allowed.
Wrong timing. The Jihad is on the up and up.
Naturally, the reformers have to be in larger numbers, influential, and with assured safety. That safety cannot be guarantied with the Mafia mentality of Islam which is encompassing the planet. Nowhere is safe. They can, and will be silenced.
I for one, cannot see that Islam can be moderated at this time.
And also, even if it could be done, who is to say that at a future date it will not descend again into the hell that real Islam really is.
Should Islam really be allowed to continue in any form?
Posted by: pr126
at October 17, 2006 4:47 AM
I do not dispute that there are brave and decent people who just happen to also be Muslims.
What I do dispute is their capacity to ever have any effect upon Islam as a whole.
I say this as I feek sure that muslims from 630AD cannot all have been bloodthirsty, lying, thieving,looting slavers. There must have been some who were not. However after near 1400 years their effect upon islamic doctrine has been minimal to say the least. That is, they have been under siege for near 1400 years so why the bother as it is hardly news?
I do not doubt that the majority of muslims are decent law abiding people who work hard for the benefit of their families and for whom any violence to anybody is both repulsive and unnecessary.
But when called to the crescent flag and asked to prove their purity of faith, or suffer the consequence, just how many will step out of line and deny this and how many will fall into step and help in the decapitation of a 15 yo christian schoolgirl?
My point is that far too many people cling to the "myth of the moderate muslim" and this is a very dangerous as despite their existence and in some numbers, their effect has always been and will always be minimal as unless they take up the violence which repells them, they are unlikely to be able to survive the attacks of their violent brethren and you can see the problem here. Most will simply melt away and join the silent crowd, but some will give up and join in.
To Illustrate this I do not know of ONE international group for the shepherding of Islam into the 21st century. Most muslims who renounce jihad and violence either do nothing about it or they apostasise and usually silently so as to not attract attention.
Too many people here and elsewhere place too much store by the possible effect of the moderate muslim who they see as coming to rescue Islam and hence the west from the jihadic sea engulfing us all while I would prefer that we "pull the plug" on these koranic waves giving the "moderate" the chaance to apostasise or be counted as an enemy.
They are either with us or they are against us.
The refusal to realise this and to even state it because it may upset some PC liberal who logs on here spells doom for us all. This is NOT Mr Spencer's view( for the sake of CAIR spies) but mine. However, it is fast becoming a majority western opinion throughout the world and that is no more than the violent Muslims and their invisible moderate siblings deserve.
at October 17, 2006 4:53 AM
Robert,
I am not certain that I would call this Canadian a moderate Muslim who is going to help bring about reform within Islam. I went to the site and discovered that far from being moderate, she is a supporter of Hizbollah.
Also, some of the causes that she champions are causes that are bound to upset conservative people. This would partially explain why her husband was told to bring her under control.
I am not saying that it is right to threaten this woman, just that she has chosen the wrong things to champion, and that is one reason why she ran into trouble.
Posted by: Maggie4Life at October 17, 2006 5:07 AM
After reading this article, I am coming to the reality that until the peaceful moderates in the west feel lest threatened, the chances of reform in Islam is lest likely to happened.
Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at October 17, 2006 6:34 AM
After seeing the Mainline Protestant denominations go into a slow, graceful decline for the past century, would any religious tradition want to follow its example and denature itself?
This is not to excuse the Canadian Muslims who are verbally pelting their lady leader (indeed, those folks are the real Islam at work). My own advice to Muslims who are appalled at the violence in their religion is that mine has its doors open--and that some dogmas are more conducive to a peaceful world.
Posted by: Kepha at October 17, 2006 7:03 AM
Robert,
In my neck of the words, Muslim moderates are apologists denying that the Jiahdists have any place in true Islam. This denial coupled with excuses, such as American foreiegn policy, are paraded in so called Inter Faith travelling circuses that confront elderly Christians and Jews with the Religion of Peace propaganda.
The elderly nod their heads beleiving that no harm will ever come from Islam and they all share coffee and cookies at the end. The local press hails the scene as "true dialogue" among religions.
These functions must be invaded by ones interested in finding the Truth and exposing these "moderates" as to what side of the equation they are reaslly on. I stunned a Catholic family yesterday when I exposed the pedophelia of Mohammed and his relationship to Aisha. The handbook by Caroline and crew is a much needed tool in confronting these so called Islamic moderates.
at October 17, 2006 7:06 AM
AIG "Should Naziism be allowed to continue in any form?"
Superficially there is a lot of difference between the two. But if you look at the skeletal structure of the two they are both supremacist ideologies who are determined to rule the earth and under no illusions about the best way to do it(ie forcibly through violence. They divide the world into "them" and "us" and have no compunctions at breaking any and every rule of civilised man and have equally no qualms about going to any length to obtain what is necessary to fulfill their needs. as for one being asupposed religion: had hitler won he would have become a prophet quite comparable with Muhammad and a hell of a more moral one as well( x million Jews aside..I am talking about his personal morality) and National socialism would ahve been promted to the level of a religion(wheree it was already heading by 1944).
If you have a question about Iran and its possible use of Nuclear weapons, then just ask yrself: "would the Nazis have used them if they had possessed them?". The answer to anyone with even the slightest knowledge of Germany from 1933 to 1945 is an unequivocal "yes". Like wondrous examples of Muslim chivalry(do not be fooled by the romatic novelist view of Saladin, he was as chivalrous as a starving buzzard) such as the seizure of the Teheran US embassy the Nazis seemed to have no respect for any civilised behaviour at all. Remember the Schindler's list scene where a german was lining up jews to see how many one bullet would kill? That actually happened and not just once!! There was the example of the hanging where the rope broke 3 times but the wire did not and many more.
There were many moderate germans, probably far more as a percentage than there are supposed to be moderate muslims anywhere who actually lived within greater germany. Most stood by helplessly, while the few who spoke up died( the white rose). Thus within 6 years the moderate germans were pummeled into passivity while certain people expect us to believe that the moderate Muslims can overcome near 1400 years of dogma and the prison made up by the six pillars of iniquity. The meek do NOT inherit the earth. The survivors do.
at October 17, 2006 7:51 AM
From what I understand of the Koran there are a few aspects of it (taken from Jews and Christians) that if lived by would make Islam less of a cult and more of a religion. Unfortunately, there is too much emphasis on violence in it to make Islam more moderate. Take out the violence by and for Allah and you have some strange derivative of Christianity. Islam would cease to be unique without the violence that cements the Koran together. It would be as if one tried to reform or moderate Nazism by removing the racism-it would cease to be Nazism at all. Those who direct Islam today know that without violence and coercion Islam can't spread so there is no way these people will give up the main tool for making Islam conquer the world.
Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at October 17, 2006 7:58 AM
In the good ol' USA, I know several muslim families who have summarily decided that they feel they preserve their traditions, but are clue-free by-and-large as to the content of the Quran and such. They are apostate by any Islamic definition - yet they are happy and peaceful.They are peaceful now. What's stopping them from deciding that, in response to some future personal crisis, strict adherence to Islam is the solution to that crisis? Even some innocent attempts to further educate themselves about Islam could turn them. I hate to say it, but the mere fact they're Muslim means they're a bomb waiting to go off. Posted by: aynrandgirl
at October 17, 2006 8:17 AM
AIG..."At the same time, WE would NEVER be allowed to do the same thing"
But no one controls exactly what I think or feel about noisy, violent, bloodsucking parasites
*reaches for the insecticide*.
at October 17, 2006 8:27 AM
Mr. Spencer,
Islam cannot be moderated. It is because Islam is a rigid code which doesn't allow for any middle-path or golden mean.
And anyway, what is the moderation ? Spurning the "Kill" calls that come from Quran ? Then Islam is just a puff of smoke. Taking Hadith with a pinch of salt ? Then Islam has no foundation to stand on. Regard Muhammed's revelations with 'slight" doubt ? How slightly ? If the revelations are to be doubted, then Islam is a fraud.
There can be no "moderate Islam" just as there can be no "moderate Nazism" or "benign dose cyanide".
Cancer can be removed only with killing radiation. So also, a cancer such Islam can only be brutally eradicated.
This eradication will sooner or later take place. Our generation is unique as it will see the end of a religion. I am quite positive about that.
Posted by: rajagopalan at October 17, 2006 8:37 AM
Islam by nature is imperialistic in the extreme. 1400 years of history proves that. Moderating it by removing the imperialism by violence will make Islam die. It needs to conquer constantly in order to survive or it devours itself, as Iraq today shows.
Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at October 17, 2006 8:38 AM
rajagopalan..sorry to be pedantic but there is a possible sublethal dose of cyanide. However I am not certain as to whether mithridatism(increasing capacity to withstand large doses of a poison by frequent exposure to multiple small sublethal doses) is possible with CN. Theoretically it should be possible but I know of no cases and I surely am not going to try it myself( an 8 yo girl survived an Auschwitz gas chamber gassing (the only one ever)..but the guard said "so what" and shot her.
Please do NOT take this as a criticism of your post with whose theme I totally agree.
Posted by: MisIslamist at October 17, 2006 8:52 AM
rajagopalan:
This eradication will sooner or later take place. Our generation is unique as it will see the end of a religion. I am quite positive about that.
It can't be eradicated without something taking its place. For Shi'a, it's a short walk to the Baha'i faith, but what for Sunni?
Posted by: Jan III Sobieski at October 17, 2006 9:07 AM
"they are also hypocritical."
Posted by: StillFedUp
Yes, and we should call them what Muhammad called them.
Munafiqin (hypocrites). Professing their belief, but denying Islam by their words or actions, privately or publically.
Muhammad didn't trust them, why should we?
Moderate Islam is false Islam.
Moderate Muslims are false Muslims or Muslims who are false (taqiyya).
Posted by: Concerned Citizen at October 17, 2006 10:11 AM
Great article Robert.
It always amazes me how apologists constantly blame Western policies for the radicalization of the Muslim community...as if their were no internal impetus at all.
By embracing Western precepts of tolerance towards women, homosexuals, etc...and in the process, invoking such intense opposition from within their own community, Tarik Fatah and Farzana Hassan Shahid are proving to us that many Muslims indeed hate us not only for the specifics of our policies, but also for who we are and what we stand for.
Posted by: Cornelius at October 17, 2006 10:38 AM
There is no moderate Islam , when i see muslims at
prayer all i see is sheep and a sheep dog.
How many Muslims Against Terrorism Marches have
you seen ?
Don`t forget they are just as adept at terrorizing
and killing each other.
at October 17, 2006 10:53 AM
The moderate muslims do not have the critical mass to counter the devastating effects of the few "Allah's insanes" or Jihadists. That's the dilemma. Here is an analogy:
If you put a teaspoonful of good wine into a barrel full of sewage, YOU GET SEWAGE. If you put a teaspoonful of sewage into a barrel full of good wine, YOU GET SEWAGE.
It does not matter. The end result is the same.
The main reason is because they (moderate) do not have a case to salvage Islam. It is hopeless. Islam can only be salvaged (reformed) by a deep and aggressive intervention to its core. I mean a complete revision of the Koran, a re-writting, re-creation, re-interpretation ....but wait, wait, wait a minute where am I going with this hopeless ideal and nebulous make belief? Mohammed himself cannot be salvaged. Moderates have to reject Mohamed in his totality because quite franckly there is nothing to salvage from wars, lies, religious plagiarism and religion of convenience. Spencer's book and many others point at nothing incredibly good. If there is any good, it is surely outweighted by an incredible amount of bad stuff.
I think we are putting the same type of pressure on the moderates and the Allah's insanes at the same time. Moderate should leave Islam and reject all dieties if they want to be free of guilt and sense of loss, they should revive the the local pagan cults, they would be far better off, because the moderate will not have their peace with the crazy brothers anyway. The apostates will be forst to go.
Posted by: sammish at October 17, 2006 11:07 AM
It is this absurd sensitivy to Muslims beliefs and this misplaced policy to respect their religion that gives Islam authenticy. Therein is Bush's blunder.
'Moderate' Muslims have no choice but to stay in the fold of radical directives when the West actually deals with the authorities of Islam in dominate Islamic countries.(Even though pointllessly though, as has been pointed out unchanged at it's core, with the Koran, Islam will always produce violent adherents, and good Muslims of any ilk won't allow change to that without a fight.)
The British method of dividing these loons into shake and Bake states in barron regions doesn't work anymore.
Katey bar the door!
Court1
Posted by: Court1 at October 17, 2006 11:33 AM
It is this absurd sensitivy to Muslims beliefs and this misplaced policy to respect their religion that gives Islam authenticy. Therein is Bush's blunder.
'Moderate' Muslims have no choice but to stay in the fold of radical directives when the West actually deals with the authorities of Islam in dominate Islamic countries.(Even though pointllessly though, as has been pointed out unchanged at it's core, with the Koran, Islam will always produce violent adherents, and good Muslims of any ilk won't allow change to that without a fight.)
The British method of dividing these loons into shake and Bake states in barron regions doesn't work anymore.
Katey bar the door!
Court1
Posted by: Court1 at October 17, 2006 11:33 AM
"Consequently, Farzana Hassan Shahid explained, “there is an underlying fear all the time...that uneasy feeling is part of my daily life".
Hitler talks about this, at length, and in many places, as the method to use in order to silence opposition. He called in "spiritual terror".
"I understood the infamous spiritual terror which this movement exerts, particularly on the bourgeoisie, which is neither morally nor mentally equal to such attacks; at a given sign it unleashes a veritable barrage of lies and slanders against whatever adversary seems most dangerous, until the nerves of the attacked persons break down and, just to have peace again, they sacrifice the hated individual". Hitler-Mein Kampf
Posted by: Frank at October 17, 2006 12:01 PM
I'm slowly making my way through the Koran. After reading up on Islam for several months, I am wondering if you have anything left to work with once you remove the violent stuff?
In Christianity, we have the example of Jesus Christ and his message of salvation. Jesus didn't issue fatwas or use violence to bring people to Christianity. And Jesus was radical in that he even wanted to include the taxpayers and prostitutes as recipients of God's love, people who were scorned by what was considered polite society at the time. As a gnostic Christian, I interpret and read the verses of the Bible and the gnostic scriptures within the context of the example of Jesus' life as described in the New Testament.
In the Buddhist faith, you have the peaceful example of the Buddha. He commited no violence. Buddhists are a peaceful lot because they follow the example of the Buddha.
In Islam, unless you remove the er ... "prophet" altogether, then what you have unequivocally is violence, bloodshed, subjugation of women, pedophilia, etc.
I doubt in my continued reading through the Koran, I'm going to find a passage that says "Mohammed is love."
Let's say you strip out the violent elements of Islam? What is left?
Going to a protestant Sunday School as a child, I were "indoctrinated" into the idea that "God is love." Is there an "Allah is love" theme in the Koran somewhere? Is there an "Allah is love" theme in the actions of his prophet Mohammed? Is there salvation for believers who don't die as martyrs? Is there even some kind of salvation by good works of kindness and charity?
right ...
I have a hard time understanding why anyone would be drawn to this religion. What's the selling point? What does Islam give the believer? I have yet to hear a moderate Muslim describe in detail, referring back to examples from the prophet's life and from the Koran, as to what's good about Islam. Maybe that's because nothing is good about Islam, and over the years believers have been brought into the fold by the sword, not because they were attracted to something good or beneficial about it. Islam is IMHO a worthless, bloody, violent, hateful ideology cooked up by a mortal man to satisfy his own power lust. Unfortunately, Mohammad put into place a snare into which countless souls have been caught.
And why in the hell any thinking, intelligent woman would choose to convert to Islam is completely beyond me.
Jane West
Posted by: Jane West at October 17, 2006 12:45 PM
The subject of 'muslim moderates' keeps comming up like there was such a thing.
A muslim has 'submitted' to Allah. To go against Allah , Mohammad or Allahs book, is to reject 'submission' and place ones own will before Allahs.
Allah hates that. No mmuslim can put his will above Allahs and not get singed.
Even if a million muslims agree that it is good to alter the Quran, Allah does not think so, and will welcome those people to the fire. Then there is the nasty little demand that it is an 'obligation' to participate and support jihad.
So called 'reformers' have a huge wall to climb over...I dont think they can do it...
at October 17, 2006 12:50 PM
Jane West-
I also am plodding through the Koran. Your observations are exactly like mine. I'm begining to think Muslims must have a different brain structure because they find comfort in such a bizarre book while most everyone on this site do not. I will try my best to finish it but it is indeed a tough read with all the repetition, confused tenses, negativity (sort of like an anti-Bible) and sheer boredom. Ugh!
Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at October 17, 2006 1:00 PM
"I have a hard time understanding why anyone would be drawn to this religion. What's the selling point?"
-Jane West
Hugh answered this a couple weeks ago in a piece entitled "What should security services do?"-
It's the Secret Decoder Ring
Posted by: hasan salami at October 17, 2006 4:22 PM
The handbook by Caroline and crew is a much needed tool in confronting these so called Islamic moderates. Posted by: BriarsBriars
Thanks for bringing this up - we are still actively enlisting contributors. Come here
Posted by: Infidel Pride at October 18, 2006 3:45 AM
duh_swami,
The truth is that anyone who is a "moderate muslim" simply is one who has decided to leave islam because they know the truth about the horrors of this violent and oppressive religion. But those that do decide must keep this decision quiet because of the threats made to ex-muslims.
Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at October 19, 2006 10:36 AM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: Comments on articles are unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Jihad Watch or Robert Spencer. Comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying may be summarily deleted. However, the fact that particular comments remain on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Robert Spencer of the views expressed therein.)