| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Yes, said the dhimmis to their masters: you are just. You are tolerant. You are superbly fair and benign. If they didn't say that, their lives could be at risk. Now, of course, in our enlightened age, we only find that kind of intellectual subjugation in American universities, taken on not on pain of death but quite voluntarily. From the Stanford Daily, with thanks to Twostellas:
To provide a forum for all members of the Stanford community to ask questions about and acquaint themselves better with the Islamic faith, two Islamic student groups hosted a panel last night entitled "Islam Reflections and Perceptions," including both students and Muslim leaders.Sponsored by the Muslim Student Awareness Network, or MSAN, in partnership with the Islamic Society at Stanford University, or ISSU, the panel featured senior Rania Eltom, MSAN president; doctoral student Ibrahim Almojel, president of ISSU; Ameena Jandali, secretary of the Islamic Networks Group - a nonprofit designed to educate the public about Islam; and Hisham Abdallah, imam of the Muslim Community Association of Santa Clara. Thom Massey, associate dean of students and cultural education affairs, moderated the event.
The speakers each described the major tenets of Islam, focusing mainly on the misperceptions of the religion....
Ah, yes. Muslims themselves seem to misunderstand Islam so easily, it's a good thing they're doing this sort of thing.
"Islam is a religion where the main focus is the relationship with God," Jandali said, adding that many assumptions about Islam are perpetuated by people who are unfamiliar with the belief system....All four speakers highlighted this one-sidedness and the inaccuracies it leads to.
During the question-and-answer session, one audience member asked why many of the world's terrorists happen to be Muslim.
Abdallah replied that the actions of terrorists are not in accordance with the teachings of Islam, especially with the ideal of perfect moral character.
"Islam does not condone terrorism," Eltom added.
Ah yes. The terrorists misunderstand Islam, you see. It's such a grand, complex thing, that millions of its own adherents have no idea that it actually does not condone terrorism. This can only be discovered, you see, after years -- decades -- of intense study and prayer.
But anyway, we're inventing the problem ourselves:
Jandali said she believes that each generation of Americans seems to identify a particular enemy, contrived to fit ideologies or economic necessities."During the Cold War the Russians were our enemies and now it is the
Muslims," she said. "Our memory of history is short."...
Of course! There was no need to fight communism at all! There is no need to fight now either! We're so glad Ms. Jandali cleared this all up for us.
Posted by Robert at April 6, 2005 7:39 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
'Of course! There was no need to fight communism at all!' ~DW
Naturally. All the Communists were trying to do was create equality for all. (All the Elite, that is)
-------
Once again, the perfect venue:
Today’s Extras:
The Leftist Academia’s propaganda machine. It's the perfect Anti-Science: Mention only the facts that back you up, ignore contradictory data, vilify anyone that questions you, stamp out calls for reform, repeat the lies again and again, and eventually you will win.
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=17622
Palestinian Enron:
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=17560
Right to Exist:
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=17584
The Science Haters:
http://techcentralstation.com/040605B.html
Muslim vs. secular press:
http://www.nationalreview.com/tks/tks.asp
![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at April 6, 2005 9:10 AM
Jandali said she believes that each generation of Americans seems to identify a particular enemy, contrived to fit ideologies or economic necessities."
This, of course, is the watered-down (but not by much) theory of "the Other" and the need for white, European, racist, colonialist Europe/America to "construct" that "Other" -- for without that "Other" to hate, that miserable, racist, dysfunctional, poverty-stricken, ruinous, chaotic, violent, worthless bunch of countries and peoples who ridiculously call themselves the West or even more absurdly "Western civilization," and who have given the world absolutely nothing of value -- compare that to the scientific achievements and immortal works of art produced over 1350 years everywhere that Islam has planted itself.
It was not enough for the West to have
constructed "the Other" of Hitler and the Nazis, and to thereby cause World War II, with all the enormous suffering that could have been avoided. It was not enough for that West to have constructed "the Other" of Lenin, and Stalin, and the Politburo, and deliberately inveigled the Red Army into Eastern Europe to seize control for local Communists so that, all over the West, people would be filled with quite unnecessary alarm and dread.
No, now they are at it again, having somehow tricked a few misguided people, a handful of extremists who were putty in the hands of the C.I.A. and the Mossad, to here and there plan their pathetic little attacks (with, admittedly, one or two actually succeeding -- to the great delight, you can be sure, of the master puppeteers in Langley and Tel Aviv). And what about all these so-called "plots" that they discover, with all that fanfare, all over Europe, or all these people picked up and charged with "terrorism" all over the United States -- what is that, if not a sustained effort at scaring people, and making them thjink there is a problem with Islam.
Yes, I know what you are going to argue. You will say -- but they never actually mention Islam. All they talk about is the "war on terror." Exactly. Exactly the point I was trying to make. It is precisely the refusal of Western governments to blame the teachings of Islam in any way, to even go out of their way even to mention Islam, that is the most diabolical part of it.
It's the old "don't put beans up your nose" strategy. By failing so noticeably and so obviouslly to mention Islam, the government is actually doing everything it can to make people focus on precisely that -- Islam. For people are not fools. Or rather, you can only fool those peoople in some ways, and not in others. By now everyone in the West knows that their own governments are not to be trusted, that they are run often by the very foolish people who foolishly try to fool them. But they can't do it. The fools who rule are even bigger fools than the fools they rule over, who cannot be so easily fooled as the ruling fools think.
And that is why, you see, when the ruling fools engaged, for the third time in less than a century (the Nazis, the Communists, and now the helpless, innocent so-called "Muslims"), in constructing "the Other" (oh, don't believe me -- read Gil Anidjar, professor at Columbia University, on the "construction of the Other -- i.e., Jews and Arabs, peas in a pod, identical victims of European hatred, and for exactly the same reasons -- the need to construct that "Other"), and that "Other" being "Muslims," they realized that the very best way to construct that Other was -- not to construct it! By not naming Islam or Muslims, everyone who had grown to distrust the leaders would focus manically on the subject of Islam and Muslims.
Have I made it clear?
Good. I thought I would.
Posted by: Hugh at April 6, 2005 9:54 AM
Islam and Postmodernism are in an alliance of convenience. Though the two philosophies are metaphysically diametrically opposed (except for the belief in evolution since Muslims believe certain people are descendents of apes and pigs), they fight a common enemy -- i.e. rationalism.
Postmodernism is more than happy to accommodate any philosophy in its multiculty context that is anti-American.
Islam is more than happy to accommodate any philosophy that will willingly (or not so willingly as the case may be) fall into the grasp of its doctrine of Dhimmitude.
Proof is in the pudding.
Posted by: ted at April 6, 2005 10:25 AM
Ms. (her-opinion-is-only-worth-half-of-a-man's-in-Islam) Jandali unconsciously indicts her own Muslim creed perfectly with this glib theory.
They create 'a world of enemies', of 'infidels' (the quintessential "Other"), and then procede to destroy them. Starting about 600 A.D., and they haven't stopped yet.
Thanks for the crucial insight Ms. J.
One thing about these spokespeople for that most misunderstood of religions:
-they never seem to be able to hear what they themselves are saying. Or apply it to their own acts.
And we're supposed to be too p.c. to mention it.
The CRUX of Islam:
all are "Other" unless they "surrender" to Mohammad's Allah.
Or die.
Cognitive dissonance anyone?
Or is this a fugue state?
Or just god-damned dumb?
Posted by: BigSleep at April 6, 2005 8:17 PM
"Islam does not condone terrorism," Eltom added.
If this is true, where are the fatwa's against terror and terrorists (apart from that one in Spain in never heared from one)?
Posted by: Ernst at April 7, 2005 5:56 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.)