| FrontPageMag.com | Articles By Robert Spencer | Articles By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Robert Spencer Bio |  |
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
There is a great deal of whining victimology in this article. I have not reproduced below the material about the disproportionate percentage of Muslims in European prisons. There is in the article, of course, no consideration at all of the possibility that they might commit crimes at a higher rate than the general population, out of their contempt for non-Muslims and non-Muslim society and law.
But note below Parvez Ahmed's wild claims that the PC American establishment, for all its fear of talking about jihad and its tiptoeing around the ideology that motivates the jihadists, is actually at war with Islam, and his relativistic "terrorism is in the eye of the beholder" nonsense. And then remember: this guy is, in the eyes of the government and media establishments, a leading American "moderate."
"War on terror is war on Islam, says advocate," by Nisa Islam Muhammad in Farrakhan's The Final Call, May 28 (thanks to the Constantinopolitan Irredentist):
WASHINGTON (FinalCall.com) - The global war on terror has become a thinly veiled excuse to wage a global war on Islam with increased arrests of Muslims, calls for regime change in Muslim countries and racial profiling, according to a leader with a national Islamic organization.“The tactic of terrorism—and yes it is a tactic, not an ideology—has been deployed by a multitude of groups of different religions, ethnicities and ideologies and yet the Islamic faith, unlike any other, is erroneously and incessantly associated with terrorism,” said Dr. Parvez Ahmed, a national board member of the Council on American Islamic Relations. “The association of a faith practiced by 1.2 billion people worldwide to terrorism creates the perception that the GWOT is a war against Islam.”
Around the world since 2001 there have been increases in the arrest and detention of Muslims.
Dr. Ahmed explained that right after 9/11 World Trade Center attacks, the federal government subjected 80,000 Arab and Muslim immigrants to fingerprinting and registration, sought out 8,000 Arab and Muslim men for FBI interviews and imprisoned over 5,000 foreign nationals in anti-terrorism preventive detention compounds.
“These arrests and detentions did not result in the conviction of a single person for a terrorist crime. Thus the U.S. government’s record for the largest ethnic profiling campaign stood at 0 for 93,000,” he said.
[...]
“Between 1980 and 2003, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelan, a group that recruits from the predominantly Hindu Tamil population in Sri Lanka and whose ideology is intertwined with Marxism, was the world’s leader in suicide terrorism. Despite this, Islamic groups receive the most attention in the Western media,” said Dr. Ahmed.
“Suicide bombings are the product of modern political violence. Suicide bombings by Muslims are not the result of any Islamic ideology, but rather they are the result of the sociopolitical conditions of occupations (such as Palestine, Chechnya and Iraq) and the outcome of proxy wars fought in Afghanistan, where America not only armed the mujihadeen, but also enabled a culture of drugs and violence,” he said.
Dr. Ahmed also noted that terrorism is a word generally applied to “one’s enemies or those with whom one disagrees.”
“Hence the decision to call someone or label some organization ‘terrorist’ becomes almost unavoidably subjective, depending largely on whether one sympathizes with or opposes the person/group/cause concerned,” he said.
“If one identifies with the victim of the violence, for example, then the act is terrorism. If, however, one identifies with the perpetrator, the violent act is regarded in a more sympathetic, if not positive (or worst, an ambivalent) light; and is not terrorism,” Dr. Ahmed said....
UPDATE: Patrick Poole kindly points out that Parvez Ahmed is simply parroting Osama bin Laden.
Posted by Robert at May 28, 2008 12:39 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
I have a request for Joe Kaufmann. Can you tell us where Ahmad has spoken? I'd like to email them this.
![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at May 28, 2008 12:55 PM
We see all this crap for the gullible every day.
How do you keep your sanity Robert Spencer?
Posted by: Sounder at May 28, 2008 12:58 PM
Well its true in India as well. Majority of Prisoners are Muslims in Indian Prisons. Similar to European Jails Muslims are disproportionately represented in Indian Prisons, because of the belief that infidel laws are subordinate to Sharia and Islamic law.
http://www.hvk.org/articles/1106/13.html
Posted by: savsiv at May 28, 2008 1:00 PM
There are so many things wrong with this that I barely no where to start. Of course our government created a meaningless phrase 'war on terror' that encourages such sloppy thinking. Our war on terrorism is a war against OUR enemies. The Tamil Tigers are simply not our direct enemy and they don't seem to act in the US (if am am wrong here I apologize). Even actors like the IRA weren't a direct enemy of the US, but they did act within the US (raising money, buying arms etc.), so the US government and media did pay attention to it. The IRA was an enemy of a close ally. That does make a difference.
I could go on but I doubt I need to.
Posted by: Jerry M at May 28, 2008 1:06 PM
"If one identifies with the victim of the violence, for example, then the act is terrorism. If, however, one identifies with the perpetrator, the violent act is regarded in a more sympathetic, if not positive (or worst, an ambivalent) light; and is not terrorism," Dr. Ahmed said....
The above statement stands alone as a prime example of how twisted a mans thinking can get when he aims to justify terrorism. How insane is this comment? VERY! Every criminal from the four corners of the world must be wishing that they had had this Nut as their defense attorney.
Dr. Loon is more like it.
at May 28, 2008 1:13 PM
So, he admits that 'terror' and 'islam' are one in the same, they are not separated.
And to have a 'war' on terror is the same as having 'war' on islam, he is saying 'don't fight islam, accept it and surrender'.
This guy must be one of the 'muslim advisers' that got the U.S. State Department to drop the term jihad.
Posted by: alaskan1000 at May 28, 2008 1:33 PM
Ah yes ... Subjectivism ... eye-of-the-beholder, wishin' makes it so ...
The philosophy of 'cause I said so!
No real objective reality out there, it's all in your head. No real objective morality to live by, it's all what the authorities say.
And it's the essence of mohammedan philosophy.
Of course that's what this savage would offer as an explanation. It's the only thing he understands.
Posted by: joeblough at May 28, 2008 1:34 PM
These arrests and detentions did not result in the conviction of a single person for a terrorist crime. Thus the U.S. government’s record for the largest ethnic profiling campaign stood at 0 for 93,000
So the record is zero terrorist attacks for a campaign that profiled only 93,000 potential perpetrators.
Suicide bombings ... are the result of the sociopolitical conditions of occupations (such as Palestine, Chechnya and Iraq).
He left out western China, southern Thailand, southern Philippines, Bali, Madrid, London, Kuala Lumpur, Jordan, Darfur ...
...the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelan, ... was the world’s leader in suicide terrorism. Despite this, Islamic groups receive the most attention in the Western media.
The Tamil Tigers have not committed suicide attacks in London, Madrid, New York, Washington, Bali, Israel, Thailand, etc. Muslims have done that and continue to do that. When Islamic groups stop committing acts of terrorism the western media will lose its interest in them.
Posted by: SaracensAtTheGates at May 28, 2008 1:38 PM
What a load of crap. Every word of it. Nice contribution by staff writer "Nisa Islam Muhammad", though.
Posted by: awake at May 28, 2008 1:46 PM
Yea, my bullshit detector is pegged right now, too.
Posted by: undaunted at May 28, 2008 2:08 PM
As Natti Nakba would say "Terror does not equal Terrorism".
It's the "ism" that makes all the difference.
Posted by: tanstaafl at May 28, 2008 2:08 PM
Yeah, what a load of c$%p. Islam is at "war" with US, not the other way around.
So, my proposal is this -
http://pedestrianinfidel.blogspot.com/2007/02/proposed-constitutional-amendment.html
Here's a taste -
Thursday, February 08, 2007
A Proposed Constitutional Amendment
Background and justification to Amendment 28
{}
Whereas on 9/11/2001 19 Muslim hijackers acting in the name of Islam killed 3,000 Americans, and numerous other acts of terrorism have been directed at the American people around the world;
{}
Whereas representatives of Islam around the world including Osama Bin Laden (architect of 9/11), the government of Iran including Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, HAMAS, Hezbollah, and other Islamic groups have declared jihad (war) on America, and regularly declare that America should cease to
exist;
{}
Article II
As representatives of Islam around the world have declared war, and committed acts of war, against the United States and its democratic allies around the world, Islam is hereby declared an enemy of the United States and its practice within the United States is now prohibited.
{}
End
---------
Read the whold thing. Nothing short of this will suffice to put a stop to this insane accomodation of an ideology that is determined to destroy our freedoms and way of life.
at May 28, 2008 2:15 PM
OT but KUDOS to foxforum
http://foxforum.foxnews.com/2008/05/27/muhammad%e2%80%99s-free-ride/
at May 28, 2008 2:21 PM
"“If one identifies with the victim of the violence, for example, then the act is terrorism. If, however, one identifies with the perpetrator, the violent act is regarded in a more sympathetic, if not positive (or worst, an ambivalent) light; and is not terrorism,” Dr. Ahmed said...."
In short, everything is relative.
When Muslim terrorists flew planes into the world trade center, I was sympathetic to the 3000 innocent victims of their barbaric act.
Now, if Dr. Ahmed can find people sympathetic to the terrorist, and I'm sure he can, they can call the perpetrators heros, Martyrs or whatever else the like.
The botton line is that, unlike so many Muslims, I know the differences between good and evil.
Posted by: rational at May 28, 2008 2:24 PM
Here, here; robscottw. Bravo.
Posted by: undaunted at May 28, 2008 2:25 PM
HA! Would that it were so!
If America is so hell-bent on blaming Islam for terrorism, then why do our government and media contortionists work so hard to ignore and explain away what motivates the many violent acts of Sudden Jihad Syndrome?
See "Denying [Islamist] Terrorism" and "More Incidents of Denying Islamist Terrorism".
/absurdity on stilts
Posted by: Terp Mole at May 28, 2008 3:03 PM
Yeah apparently anyone who bothers to study the Quran then has the gumption to actually pay attention to what Jihadis say or do in relation to these sacred texts is an “Islamophobe”. This becomes especially troubling when one tries to publish accounts of this on the internet in lets say a blog, or when a people and government try to protect itself from attack from said groups. I found this gem while reviewing the Wiki definition of an Islamophobe. I had to laugh out loud here is part of it.
"Notes on the Ideological Patrons of an Islamophobe, Robert Spencer"
by Carl W. Ernst
William R. Kenan, Jr., Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies
and Director of the Carolina Center for the Study of the Middle East and Muslim Civilizations
University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill
Here is the self-description of Robert Spencer:
"ROBERT SPENCER, the director of Jihad Watch, is a writer and researcher who has studied Islam for more than twenty years. He is the author of Onward Muslim Soldiers: How Jihad Still Threatens America and the West (Regnery [1]) and Islam Unveiled: Disturbing Questions About the World's Fastest Growing Faith (Encounter [2]). He is coauthor, with Daniel Ali, of Inside Islam: A Guide for Catholics (Ascension) and coeditor of the forthcoming essay collection The Myth of Islamic Tolerance
Spencer (MA, Religious Studies, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) is an Adjunct Fellow with the Free Congress Foundation [3]. He has written seven monographs on Islam that are available from the Foundation: An Introduction to the Qur'an; Women and Islam; An Islamic Primer; Islam and the West; The Islamic Disinformation Lobby; Islam vs. Christianity; and Jihad in Context." (http://www.jihadwatch.org/spencer/)
Who are the publishing firms that publish Spencer's works? Who funds them? Who supports his work? Some information on these patrons is given below (the numbers refer to the citations of the organizations marked in bold in the paragraph above). This information is significant because these books are not scholarly, and they do not pass the review of blind refereed evaluation practiced by university presses. They are instead supported by specific political and ideological interests through think-tanks and private foundations. They need to be evaluated differently from scholarly studies, since their agenda does not have to do with the scholarly goals of the humanities and the social sciences. In particular, the lectures given by authors such as Spencer on college campuses may be misunderstood as being equivalent to scholarly research. While it certainly may be acknowledged that scholarship has political implications, independent research needs to be distinguished from hired polemics.
The publications of Spencer belong to the class of Islamophobic extremism that is promoted and supported by right-wing organizations, who are perpetuating a type of bigotry similar to anti-Semitism and racial prejudice. They are to be viewed with great suspicion by anyone who wishes to find reliable and scholarly information on the subject of Islam. I make these remarks because Spencer was invited to speak at UNC-Chapel Hill in the spring of 2004; I shared these observations with UNC students at the time to indicate that his views have no basis in scholarship (he has no academic training in Islamic studies whatever; his M.A. degree was in the field of early Christianity). For further information on Islamophobia, see my book Following Muhammad: Rethinking Islam in the Contemporary World (UNC Press, 2003), and The New Crusades: Constructing the Muslim Enemy, ed. Emran Qureshi and Michael A. Sells (Columbia University Press, 2003). Note that both of the latter books are published by university presses on the basis of blind peer review by qualified scholars.
at May 28, 2008 3:04 PM
This moron, like other Islam apologists, is trying hard to whitewash Islamic crimes. Liberation Tigers have been fighting inside Sri Lanka, against the government. They have not killed innocent civilians outside Sri Lanka, whereas Muslims have indulged in wanton and mindless killings worldwide: NY, London, Madrid, Bombay, Delhi, Jaipur, Hyderabad,Bali, Thailand,..... (the list goes on). The Tigers do not preach religious supremacy nor do they seek a Hindu world. In their lunacy, Muslims seek an Islamic world and show utter contempt for infidels. The taqiya of "Muslim persecution" will not work. For the perpetually offended, my message is this: get ready to have your ass kicked thoroughly because you brought this on yourself.
Posted by: IndianTiger at May 28, 2008 3:04 PM
It’s up to the Moslems to prove to us they’re not terrorists, not with words but with deeds. Shoot, they’ve been at it for 1400 years with their Jihad and enslavement, especially of women, and the usual murders, kidnappings, beheadings, death fatwas, suicide bombings, so nothing new here. They whine and cry about how they are being ‘mistreated’ for their criminal activities in the name of Islam, for their 'Cult of Allah'. Why? They richly deserve it!
Tough breaks, but we will keep arresting them and incarcerating them until they stop attacking us in New York, Paris, London, Madrid, Moscow, Bali, Basra, Baghdad, Kabul, Jordan, Morocco, Turkey, Sudan, Somalia, Israel, Argentina, Philippines, Algeria, Nigeria, etc.
How about if CAIR et al prove to us they’re not terrorists, since the evidence is very much proving they ARE terrorists, in the name of their so-called 'religion of peace'.
at May 28, 2008 3:26 PM
A Skunk wearing a lot of Musk hoping we will not notice. Fat chance.
Posted by: flowerknife_us at May 28, 2008 3:26 PM
"War on terror is war on Islam"
Nisa Muhammed above
If it isn't, it certainly needs to be and I am down with it.
at May 28, 2008 3:58 PM
I'll make a deal with him. As soon as muslims stop committing near daily terrorist attacks around the globe, I'll stop associating them with terrorists.
at May 28, 2008 4:19 PM
Total B.S.
“Suicide bombings are the product of modern political violence. Suicide bombings by Muslims are not the result of any Islamic ideology, but rather they are the result of the sociopolitical conditions of occupations (such as Palestine, Chechnya and Iraq) and the outcome of proxy wars fought in Afghanistan, where America not only armed the mujihadeen, but also enabled a culture of drugs and violence,” he said.
I have to call bullshit on that. quotes taken from
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/021115.php
The Quran sanctions suicide attacks.
“Allah has purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Quran: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? Then rejoice in the bargain which you have concluded: that is the achievement supreme.” (tmq 9:111)
Jihad is required
“Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued”, (tmq 9:29) which is at the time of war and fighting.
So peace and fighting are two situations, which remain un-abrogated, i.e. neither abrogates the other.
2. In addition to this, the saying and actions of Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) show that Jihad definitely is to start (offensive) fighting the kuffar to make the Words of Allah the highest and to propagate (da’wa) the call of Islam. Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said,
“I have been ordered to fight the people until they bear witness that, ‘there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is His Messenger’ and they establish the prayer and the zakat. And if they do this, then from me is protected their blood and their wealth except by the right granted by Allah.”
as a Kurfar this makes me decidedly Islamophobic.
at May 28, 2008 4:26 PM
Oh my!! more drivel from the whiners. I'm down with it too pismopal. If they aren't spouting hatred against us, they're whining. Just once, ONCE, I would like to hear something constructive from them. Of course, to them it's constructive because it seems to be working ;o(
Why am I in this handbasket and where are we going?
Posted by: gymgal at May 28, 2008 4:39 PM
Mr. Ahmed, could care please comment on the roughly 1,400 years of jihad conquest, inspired by the Prophet, which resulted in, conservatively estimated, the murder of over 270 million human beings? Could you state by what principles are we forbidden to fight back against you people? Please elaborate the specifics of your reasoning. Cite any texts you wish, which justify these actions.
If you won't do this, please take your tired act somewhere else.
at May 28, 2008 4:42 PM
How about this little beauty of a Youtube video. Gotta feel sorry for the police in this one. It is a microcosm of this article though the policemen are us and the mob is CAIR.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZNx0xHe0p0&eurl=http://www.bravenewsworld.blogspot.com/
Posted by: ethoman at May 28, 2008 4:46 PM
Enlightened Western Civilization shall prevail.
islam shall perish.
Posted by: CGW at May 28, 2008 5:12 PM
The idiot is equating terror and Islam.
Thanks for letting us know. We suspected as much.
Posted by: Henrik at May 28, 2008 5:13 PM
Per Dr. Douglas Johnston, of the International Center for Religion and Diplomacy (from the article):
“One person, one vote was the last thing on people’s minds in Iraq. They wanted the ability to practice their religion."
That 'religion' being Islam; a complete way of life in which religion IS governance and voting is simply unnecessary.
Posted by: PRCS at May 28, 2008 5:51 PM
When one sees the delusion in the ISLAMISTs' very thinking, it's stunning.Achmed actually says that it's ERRONEOUS to associate ISLAM and TERRORISM--!He must have a Phd.in TAQQYIAH!
Posted by: CHOI at May 28, 2008 6:34 PM
“Between 1980 and 2003, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelan, a group that recruits from the predominantly Hindu Tamil population in Sri Lanka and whose ideology is intertwined with Marxism, was the world’s leader in suicide terrorism. Despite this, Islamic groups receive the most attention in the Western media,” said Dr. Ahmed."
Excuse me for injecting some reality into this diatribe, but, the Tamil Tigers are isolated in Sri Lanka. The rest of the world has NOTHING to fear from this rebel political group.
Whereas, the entire world has to fear Islamic Terrorism and the Islamic Terrorist attacks that have taken place worldwide.
Excuse me, again, Dr. Ahmed, for injecting some reality into your diatribe.
Posted by: darcy at May 28, 2008 7:36 PM
“The tactic of terrorism—and yes it is a tactic, not an ideology—has been deployed by a multitude of groups of different religions, ethnicities and ideologies and yet the Islamic faith, unlike any other, is erroneously and incessantly associated with terrorism.
So Ahmed, those other groups practice terrorism, but Islam does not? A multitude of them? How many is a multitude? The terrorist deadly act counter is up to 11156, is that a multitude?
Posted by: duh_swami at May 28, 2008 9:26 PM
Who needs reality when we can cook our own?
Inverted logic, demented arguments, perverted propaganda.
These people belong in a lunatic asylum. We shouldn't allow them to run free...
Posted by: sheik yer'mami at May 28, 2008 11:37 PM
Since Islam is a subversive, anti-Constitutional, anti-Universal Declaration of Human Rights, intolerant, imperialistic movement bent on establishing a global, theocratic tyranny, then, yes, the "War on Terror" is a war against Islam.
Until the Koran no longer preaches terror, sanity demands it.
Posted by: profitsbeard at May 29, 2008 12:55 AM
Can anyone recall any recent terror attacks that were the work of non-muslims? I certainly can't but every day I hear about another terror attack by muslims.
I don't know why I get so worked up when I read articles like this because I know that muslims live in a parallel universe, surrounded by enemies, awash in paranoia, and always on the defensive. Muslims are incapable of recognizing, much less admitting, any faults or mistakes and they never take the blame for anything. They are perpetual victims of discrimination, racism, colonialism, and islamophobia, and everyone who fails to appreciate the perfection of islam is an islamophobe. If we won't all convert to islam like good little slaves, we should shut up and get out of the umma's way. It's just so unfair that the best of people are confronted with so many annoying obstacles.
Instead of condemning the daily muslim terror attacks around the world, they condemn islamophobia! Hell, over 10,000 terrorist attacks by muslims since 9/11 is no reason to question islam or suggest that it inculcates hate and violence! If they only knew how stupid they look and sound and how insulting their diatribes are to sane, observant people who know who today's terrorists are. All muslims are potential terrorists and if the war on terror is a war against islam, let's hurry up and defeat it and send them all back to their lovely homelands where they belong. Then they can wallow in islam with no interference whatsoever. People who voluntarily immigrate to a place teeming with "filth" (us) and live among people they openly despise for the purpose of exploiting our superior society and economy are truly among the lowest and most deluded forms of life. They have nothing that we need, plenty we don't want, and whether they realize it or not, they are despicable hypocrites living on borrowed time.
Just like their cowardly fears of backlash after a muslim terror attack, their endless lies and distortions will eventually become self-fulfilled prophesy. They literally BEG TO BE DESPISED and I'm caving under the pressure.
Posted by: Susanp at May 29, 2008 1:02 AM
(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.)