Nice to see a muslim go into such detail to illustrate how Islam has been hijacked using scripture.Hard to deny her case.

I was really getting sick of the tarnishing Islam image line"O"crap TM.

Really refreshing.

Posted by: KAOSKTRL at July 10, 2005 7:15 PM

Merryl said.... But it still disturbs me that the reassurance of our condemnation is so eagerly sought, as if over condemnation might be in doubt rather than being the most natural human response to incomprehensible acts by people I don't know. ...

Well Merryl, the next time non-Muslim terrorists do their thing, we'll be sure not to contact you. Good grief.

Posted by: reset at July 10, 2005 7:44 PM

and then Merryl said...There is little point in insisting Islam is a religion of peace, whose central principle is justice, when the traditional language of religion we use and the way we operate invokes images of war and defiance, emphasises exclusivity, and prejudicially stereotypes non-Muslims.

As Muslims we decode what lies behind these messages. We know that what sounds like blood curdling rhetoric intends to teach us peace, tolerance and numerous virtues....

Triple Good Grief. What a fool.

Posted by: reset at July 10, 2005 8:00 PM

Note the manichean division of the world and the usurpation of her Welsh heritage.

She is the prime example of the foaming at the mouth extreme leftist who at last found a religion of hate filled rapture that legitimised her hatred for America - Islam.

Her moaning and nonsense about Western 'black propaganda' is par for the course, Islamist propaganda, self pitying whitewashing of history, a study of victimhood and a denial of centuries of HORROR, Islamic oppression, the theology of Kaffirdom hotwired into Islam, the Jihadic Crusades, the bigotry and intolerance and nightmare of Islamic rule every where it went.

Posted by: Zico at July 10, 2005 8:02 PM

So she rejects the concepts of jihad and shariah law and sticks to the five pillars, or what? More likely it's another dose of taqqiyah, and she was chosen for this latest spin-job because she's a British convert - and a native Brit would never wish any harm on the people she grew up with, right?

Posted by: Doctor Phibes at July 10, 2005 8:03 PM

Well, since collective responsibility has been assessed upon the Kafir by these bombings, why shouldn't collective responsibility be assessed in turn upon Muslims for those same bombings?

Posted by: treehugger at July 10, 2005 8:10 PM

ROP®
http://www.sacredcowburgers.com/mystery/showpics.cgi?real_islam

Posted by: Carolyn2 at July 10, 2005 8:12 PM

Merryl Wyn Davies is co-author of The No- Nonsense Guide To Islam, published by New Internationalist Publications...

Is that a typo? I think so. Let me correct it - The No Sense Guide to Islam. I couldn't resist.

That has to be one of the most insipid articles I have ever read.

Posted by: reset at July 10, 2005 8:14 PM

Islam has always attracted the more bizarre members of Western society. There was Ignaz Weiss, one of the men who gave his name to the famous Weiss-Schwartz Syndrome (which see, by googling the name). There was St. John Philby, father of the Soviet spy Kim Philby -- the father became a Muslim, the son a Soviet spy, each in his own way expressing, as the age permitted, his alienation and hatred of his own civilization and country.

There are also the Spiritual Searchers. The person who needs to Do Something Different, who wants to make himself -- for himself -- seem just a bit more interesting than he might otherwise be. There are those who seek a sense of not true community, but the Crowd as Community, the crowd that holds rallies, or even Nuremburg Rallies, together, the crowd that supports every other member of that same umma no matter what, but owes nothing but inculcated hostility and hatred to those who are the other, the non-Muslim. For the whole notion of "the Other" originates, or at least is central to, not the West (which is so often accused of requiring it) but of Islam itself, where the world is divided between Believer and Infidel.

Twenty years ago, ten years ago, perhaps, just perhaps, even five years ago, a convert to Islam might be seen as someone to be regarded quizzically, a bit strange, odd, peculiar -- but not necessariy a mortal threat. Those days are over. Anyone in the Western world who now converts to Islam knows, or should know, what they are getting into. And what they are getting into, what they are doing by converting to Islam, is embracing a vehicle that declares their own alientation and hatred of the West and of Infidels. They may protest this. Too bad. That is how they should be regarded -- as a security threat, as a menace.

There is one exception: the melancholy case of women who, falling for a Muslim man, and his coney-pitch, and unaware of what Islam is all about (but believing in that soft voice, those liquid brown eyes, and forgetting the desperate desire to acquire a Western wife, and a green card or its variants in other Western countries), marry and even have children, and then sooner or later discover what Islam is all about, and then the ties of the heart that link them to their own children, who have often been thoroughly islamized, brainwashed, and cannot possibly come out of it, no matter how the anguished mother tries, no matter how she may put out such books as "Leaving Islam" (edited by Ibn Warraq). Perhaps a tape of former Muslims, with the attractive Ayaan Hirsi Ali in the starring role, might be made, and put up on the Internet. There are those doing their best to educate doubting Muslims -- Ali Sina is a one-man multitude, who is tireless. There are others.

There are those who are born into Islam and escape, or who are born into it, and feel that they cannot leave the faith of their ancestors, and so filiopietistic sentiments keep them in, or at least keep them identifying themselves as Muslims. Some of them may find it easier to leave Islam if they have something else to call themselves, or if they find a different faith. Christianity is the most likely alternative. It is doubtful, for example, that all those Muslims in India, or in Bangladesh, or in Pakistan, if they were to give up Islam, would quickly return to Hinduism, the faith of their ancestors who were treated so badly that they felt they had to embrace Islam -- they are more likely to become Christians.

And what about Iran? The Islamic Republic has done what the outside Infidels could never have done. It has called Islam itself into permanent question, among the morally and intellectually aware segment of the population.

And there, there is another possiblity. Islam can be seen for what it was: an Arab import, a vehicle brought by more primitive Arabs to more sophisticated Persians. It was a vehicle for linguistic and cultural imperialism. Iranians know, or believe they know, that Firdowsi's Shahnameh helped to preserve Farsi, and to beat back the imposition of Arabic and the arabization that necessarily followed (see, in this respect, the dazzling article at www.eccelibano.com, about teaching Arabic at Middlebury, and the use of Arabic as a tool for convincing non-Arabs all over the MIddle East that they are, in fact, Arabs -- one of the astonishing achievements of Arab imperialism that worked, and works still, through the arabization that accompanies islamization).

Zoroastrianism is still there. It really does not matter what its contents are. It does not threaten the world. It is the national religion, the pre-Islamic religion, of Iran. It ought to find converts -- among all those "Muslims" whose ancestors were, like so many non-Arabs (the HIndus who are now Muslims in Pakistan and Bangladesh, for example), forcibly converted and who, themselves, having had a quarter-century of the undiluted horror of Islam, should be prepared not only to throw off the regime, but to throw off the mental shackles of Islam that make despotism, inshallah-fatalism, fanaticism, and violence not only possible, but indeed likely.

As for this girl, too bad she could not have taken up some other interest (was a man involved in her inveiglement?)-- you know, memorizing the the Mabinogion, or entering the Eistedfodd, or reading The Anathemata, or something like that.

Posted by: Hugh at July 10, 2005 8:21 PM

Islam has always attracted the more bizarre members of Western society. There was Ignaz Weiss, one of the men who gave his name to the famous Weiss-Schwartz Syndrome (which see, by googling the name). There was St. John Philby, father of the Soviet spy Kim Philby -- the father became a Muslim, the son a Soviet spy, each in his own way expressing, as the age permitted, his alienation and hatred of his own civilization and country.

There are also the Spiritual Searchers. The person who needs to Do Something Different, who wants to make himself -- for himself -- seem just a bit more interesting than he might otherwise be. There are those who seek a sense of not true community, but the Crowd as Community, the crowd that holds rallies, or even Nuremburg Rallies, together, the crowd that supports every other member of that same umma no matter what, but owes nothing but inculcated hostility and hatred to those who are the other, the non-Muslim. For the whole notion of "the Other" originates, or at least is central to, not the West (which is so often accused of requiring it) but of Islam itself, where the world is divided between Believer and Infidel.

Twenty years ago, ten years ago, perhaps, just perhaps, even five years ago, a convert to Islam might be seen as someone to be regarded quizzically, a bit strange, odd, peculiar -- but not necessariy a mortal threat. Those days are over. Anyone in the Western world who now converts to Islam knows, or should know, what they are getting into. And what they are getting into, what they are doing by converting to Islam, is embracing a vehicle that declares their own alientation and hatred of the West and of Infidels. They may protest this. Too bad. That is how they should be regarded -- as a security threat, as a menace.

There is one exception: the melancholy case of women who, falling for a Muslim man, and his coney-pitch, and unaware of what Islam is all about (but believing in that soft voice, those liquid brown eyes, and forgetting the desperate desire to acquire a Western wife, and a green card or its variants in other Western countries), marry and even have children, and then sooner or later discover what Islam is all about, and then the ties of the heart that link them to their own children, who have often been thoroughly islamized, brainwashed, and cannot possibly come out of it, no matter how the anguished mother tries, no matter how she may put out such books as "Leaving Islam" (edited by Ibn Warraq). Perhaps a tape of former Muslims, with the attractive Ayaan Hirsi Ali in the starring role, might be made, and put up on the Internet. There are those doing their best to educate doubting Muslims -- Ali Sina is a one-man multitude, who is tireless. There are others.

There are those who are born into Islam and escape, or who are born into it, and feel that they cannot leave the faith of their ancestors, and so filiopietistic sentiments keep them in, or at least keep them identifying themselves as Muslims. Some of them may find it easier to leave Islam if they have something else to call themselves, or if they find a different faith. Christianity is the most likely alternative. It is doubtful, for example, that all those Muslims in India, or in Bangladesh, or in Pakistan, if they were to give up Islam, would quickly return to Hinduism, the faith of their ancestors who were treated so badly that they felt they had to embrace Islam -- they are more likely to become Christians.

And what about Iran? The Islamic Republic has done what the outside Infidels could never have done. It has called Islam itself into permanent question, among the morally and intellectually aware segment of the population.

And there, there is another possiblity. Islam can be seen for what it was: an Arab import, a vehicle brought by more primitive Arabs to more sophisticated Persians. It was a vehicle for linguistic and cultural imperialism. Iranians know, or believe they know, that Firdowsi's Shahnameh helped to preserve Farsi, and to beat back the imposition of Arabic and the arabization that necessarily followed (see, in this respect, the dazzling article at www.eccelibano.com, about teaching Arabic at Middlebury, and the use of Arabic as a tool for convincing non-Arabs all over the MIddle East that they are, in fact, Arabs -- one of the astonishing achievements of Arab imperialism that worked, and works still, through the arabization that accompanies islamization).

Zoroastrianism is still there. It really does not matter what its contents are. It does not threaten the world. It is the national religion, the pre-Islamic religion, of Iran. It ought to find converts -- among all those "Muslims" whose ancestors were, like so many non-Arabs (the HIndus who are now Muslims in Pakistan and Bangladesh, for example), forcibly converted and who, themselves, having had a quarter-century of the undiluted horror of Islam, should be prepared not only to throw off the regime, but to throw off the mental shackles of Islam that make despotism, inshallah-fatalism, fanaticism, and violence not only possible, but indeed likely.

As for this girl, too bad she could not have taken up some other interest (was a man involved in her inveiglement?)-- you know, memorizing the the Mabinogion, or entering the Eistedfodd, or reading The Anathemata, or something like that.

Posted by: Hugh at July 10, 2005 8:23 PM

Hugh, isn't Iran at least a lost cause for now? At least until the Iranians see if Ahmed succeeds or fails? The ayatollahs control all the wealth, and I don't see that changing. I think those in Iran who see their government for the despot it is just want to get out. They want to go to America, or Canada or France or Englad or anywhere in the EU. Just anywhere that the Islamists do not rule. Who does that leave? The rulers and the supplicants.

Posted by: reset at July 10, 2005 9:07 PM

Islam is a religion of peace... But how do we convince you?

Umm, it might help if you stopped killing us and/or stopped threatening to kill us. Yes, we are a picky lot, aren't we, Ms. Davis? But there you have it, such is your cross to bear (note: please don't kill me for being so insensitive as to use the dreaded "c" word to a Muslim. I'll try to improve, honest I will.)

As Muslims we decode what lies behind these messages. We know that what sounds like blood curdling rhetoric intends to teach us peace, tolerance and numerous virtues.

Yes, it's all our stupid kaffir fault that we can't "decode" the peaceful, tolerant and virtuous messages behind "slay the infidels wherever you find them." Just like the Jews had trouble "decoding" the peaceful, tolerant messages contained in Mein Kampf.

Sigh. We're a thick lot, aren't we, Ms Davis? So sorry you have to be burdened with our pig-headed infidel refusal to face the facts that are clearly "encoded" in the wonderful, peaceful Koran. If only we dumb infidels could find the peaceful, tolerant messages "encoded" in the Koran, in words like "kill" "slay" and "strike off their fingertips", the world would be such a better place.

But we're not the only ones, are we? It looks like there are plenty of Muslims who have trouble "decoding" the peaceful, tolerant messages in the Koran too, like the ones who just blew up 50 of your countrymen in one go. Funny, that.

What "moral compass" exactly do you derive from this fruitcake cult anyways, you idiotic airhead? You never got around to writing about it, did you, probably because there isn't any.

What a pathetic moron. This woman is truly "special" -- as in "special education." (US definition.)

Posted by: Suzan at July 10, 2005 9:09 PM

Good point Suzan.

What morality does one get from Islam that you can't get elsewhere?

Though what morality does one get from Islam at all?

Posted by: Voltaire at July 10, 2005 9:50 PM

What is in the hearts of these terrorists, God alone knows - I certainly don't.

Then, dear Merryl, you certainly don't have a clue about what you've converted to, do you?

But by their deeds I know they are nothing of me,

Yeah, you just keep repeating that to yourself.

the faith that is my secure handhold on life, the unequivocal morality it teaches.

Oh, so that's why you converted. So that you can have your hand held through each and every step of your life. Don't have to make any decisions, any difficult choices. Life can be tough sometimes, but your faith removes your will, your brain and just leads you through the motions of life. Yes, I suppose that gives you a lot of inner peace, being freed from all the stresses of being a free human, but then a lobotomy would give you the same result too.

And the "unequivocal morality" bit - yes, the West is so decadent and immoral, what with people having the freedom to make their own choices in life, good or bad. So much better to hang out with people who think no social contact btwn men and women is moral, while blowing up people, hacking their heads off, murdering women who "dishonor" their families, forced marriages and beating their wives is okey dokey. Sorry, but give me Western decadence and "immorality" any day, over Islamic so-called "morality".

Posted by: feralee at July 10, 2005 9:52 PM

"We need your willingness to listen. There must be a new agenda, new debates, new action in new directions if we are to eradicate the fanatical mass murderers who would silence and divide us."

That all sounds very nice and cosy, except for the fact if we enter the debate we'll face up to seven years in prison. Perhaps Merryl and her co-religionists can arrange for some imams to visit us in prison, and help us to "decode" the "blood-curdling rhetoric" that we so stupidly chose to question. And perhaps when we're in prison we'll be allowed to quote verses from the koran, and to ask the imams what they mean - or will this result in another seven year sentence?

Posted by: Doctor Phibes at July 10, 2005 9:59 PM

Hugh,

"Islam has always attracted the more bizarre members of Western society."

Don't forget:

"the charismatic leader of the English neo-Nazi movement, David Myatt, now become Abdul Aziz ibn Myatt, [who] appeals to those nostalgic Axis members and to all enemies of the Zionists, to embrace with him the Jihad, the “true martial religion”, which will most effectively fight against the Jews and the Americans. Another sign of this rapprochement: on April 3, 2003... Omar Bakri Mohamed... officially received Myatt and accorded him a “welcome into Islam”, specifying to journalists that the neo-Nazi past of this neophyte had “no special importance once their goals converged in common” "

"...one of the major artisans of the “Islamonazi synthesis,” Johann Von Leers (14), Goebbel’s old right arm, responsible for anti-Semitic propaganda under the Third Reich. Become Omar Amin after having been recruited in Egypt by Nasser, who nominated him responsible for anti-Jewish propaganda in Cairo, Von Leers converted to Islam after his contact with the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood. His example continues to inspire an Islamophile and pro-Arab current of the extreme right. It is in his memory that one of the actual ringleaders of the new pro-Islamist European right, the Italian Claudio Mutti, has chosen for his name of conversion to Islam that of Omar Amin."

Posted by: metaxy at July 10, 2005 10:01 PM

An article by Ibn Warraq, which can be found through googling "Ibn Warraq" and "Islam" and "Fascism," shows how the latter two are remarkably similar. He takes 14 defining characteristics (borrowed from an essay by Umberto Eco), that are said (by Eco) of fascism, and considers to what extent these also are defining characteristics of Islam. Quite a fit. And if that particular glove fits, you really can't acquit.

Posted by: Hugh at July 10, 2005 10:08 PM

"Merryl Wyn Davies: Islam is a religion of peace... But how do we convince you?"

Well, the prophet Mohammad’s solution to this was to march into a city (e.g. Mecca) at the head of tens of thousands of invading Muslim warriors and start murdering political prisoners. A scimitar held to a non-Muslims throat did wonders. "Yes, Mo. It is a religion of peace. Whatever you say. Where do I go to convert again?"

Posted by: obl r us at July 10, 2005 10:09 PM

Alexandre del Valle and Paul Berman have also noted, and extensively analyzed, the Islam/Fascism connection.

Posted by: metaxy at July 10, 2005 10:14 PM

Leftist dolts like Merryl Wyn Davies and Karen Armstrong need to be treated with ECT (electroconvulsive therapy).

Posted by: metaxy at July 10, 2005 10:18 PM

Ah, she's a convert! More than any other religion, when one converts to Islam, even the Muslims never really accept them. Oh, now I am not shedding any tears for her, but this is where she is coming from, no doubt. Apologists. All of them.

We can't even waste our time asking about their morality. What an oxymoron that is - no, I didn't call anyone a moron, but, if the shoe....

Posted by: JW gal at July 10, 2005 10:30 PM

Great post, Suzan .

Posted by: Carolyn2 at July 10, 2005 10:55 PM

This stupid bitch is a blatant hater. Just another fucked up stupid ass feminist. A flaming dyke. A history revisionist. A lying ugly bloated bag of shit.

Scroll down to see the picture of this stupid **nt.
http://www.salaam.co.uk/themeofthemonth/september03_index.php?l=10

Check out her left wing bullshit books she writes.

Posted by: Cross at July 10, 2005 11:21 PM

http://www.salaam.co.uk/themeofthemonth/september03/images/merryl.jpg

LMAO look at this deranged dyke. A feminist psycho cow. LOL what a joke. She writes anti American books and promotes islam. This bitc* is royally fuc*ed up.

Posted by: Cross at July 10, 2005 11:53 PM

Like all Muslims, I'm practised at the condemnation of outrages...

I wonder how she comes by all this practice? As a Jew, I've never in my life had to apologize or be ashamed of my co-religionists. Christians? Do you apologize a lot? It's only the Moslems who need to apologize, so I wonder.....

Posted by: Seymour Paine at July 11, 2005 12:11 AM

Since Ms. Revert has clearly never read the Koran critically (I guess the first line of this 'holy' diatribe blew a fuse in her cortex and it was all 'sweetness and light' instead of bloodlust and vendetta for her after that point), the rest of her bewilderment is understandable.

When she proclaims the 'peacefulness' of a book of unending revenge fantasies, larded with Biblical plagiarisms, and dusted with a sugar-coating of meaningless ejacultations about the 'compassion' of a 'deity' (who is always being called on to destroy someone Mohammad finds a threat to his global terror state), she doesn't even realize how ridiculous she sounds. And how utterly delusional.

The Koran is a warlord's handbook.

Genghis Khan could have written it. Or Hitler. Or Pol Pot. That she cannot recognize this naked fact of the text itself betrays the typical 'religious' blindness of the 'true devotee'. Their normal insight is cauterized by dogma when entering such an extremist creed.

How ANY woman, other than a masochistic imbecile- perhaps with romanticized blindspots paralyzing their normal, self-preserving instincts (from watching too many close-ups of Omar Sharif in "Lawrence of Arabia"?) could join a faith that mocks them (in its 'holy' texts) as only worth 'half a man', strikes me as the sign of a mind so desperately out of place in the world that is will cling even to a 'burning log' in the cataract of its intellectual distress.

Islam is her burning log.

Maybe she likes being a second-class punching bag for patriarchal egomaniacal schmucks?

Or maybe the 7th century is cozy for a mental throwback?

She could convince me that Islam was a religion of peace by leaving it... and NOT being killed for being an apostate- as orthodox Islam dictates.

Nothing less would work on my skepticism.

Islam must reform its Koranic bloodlust, or die.

Posted by: BigSleep at July 11, 2005 1:00 AM

Cross,

Unfortunately, anti-American Leftism and Islam are more and more becoming cozy, spooning bedfellows.

Meryl Wyn Davies is not an aberration in our West. Her comfortable anti-Americanism and anti-Westernism is the norm in the modern West. Crazy, ain't it?

Posted by: metaxy at July 11, 2005 1:41 AM

Cross,

Unfortunately, anti-American Leftism and Islam are more and more becoming cozy, spooning bedfellows.

Meryl Wyn Davies is not an aberration in our West. Her comfortable anti-Americanism and anti-Westernism is the norm in the modern West. Crazy, ain't it?

Posted by: metaxy at July 11, 2005 1:45 AM

Book writen by this leftist gone Muslim:

Why Do People Hate America?
by Ziauddin Sardar & Merryl Wyn Davies
£7.99 paperback
American corporations and popular culture affect the lives & infect the indigenous cultures of millions around the world. The foreign policy of the US government, backed by its military strength, has unprecedented global influence now that the USA is the world's only superpower - its first 'hyperpower'. Many people do hate America, in the Middle East and the developing countries as well as in Europe. The authors consider this hatred in the context of America's own perception of itself, and provide an important contribution to a debate which needs to be addressed by people of all nations, cultures, and political persuasions.
Icon Books (2002) ISBN 184046383x

http://www.newsfromnowhere.org.uk/books/DisplayBookInfo.php?ISBN=184046383x

Posted by: dennisw at July 11, 2005 8:35 AM

The New Internationalist is now publishing tripe promoting Islam! Anyone need any more proof of David Horowitz's contention of an Unholy Alliance that is based wholly on anti-Americanism?

Posted by: waterdragon52 at July 11, 2005 9:00 AM

The void that Islam fills in this woman's life, as she herself tells us, is the need for absolutes, for binding morality, for a sense of right and wrong. Those of us who are familiar with all the loopholes for every kind of downright evil that Islam gives its members, beginning with its prophet (who is recorded in the Qur'an itself, more than once, defending himself for being caught in contradiction), will snigger with contemptuous pity; although it does tell us what kind of miserably impoverished intellectual and moral background she comes from.

The point is however another. The fact that a given creed "satisfies" any of your needs is not in the least evidence that it is true or that it ought to be accepted. As Matthew Arnold put it long ago (and he put it kindly), "nor does the being hungry prove that we have bread". The only religion worth having is one that is true as a matter of fact, or at least that cannot be shown to be grossly, crassly wrong. I always tell people that I am Catholic because I believe the claims of the Catholic Church and of the New Testament true as a matter of fact. The ethics, even the poetry and beauty of, are strictly secondary. The point is that we believe that it really happened. This is not a new doctrine: Paul preached it (Cor.15.12-19). As a historian, I will defend the historicity of the Gospel narrative to anyone who cares to listen (though not in this forum, which is unsuitable to the purpose).

Now Islam entails a number of historical claims, made in the Qur'an with the supposed authority of Divine revelation, and many of which are as plainly wrong as that the moon is made of green cheese. Any Westerner, brought up to the tradition of critical and scholarly history, who accepts these claims, is in open rebellion, not against Christianity or atheism or liberalism or whatever, but against reason and sound history. And the revolt against reason is always catastrophic.

Posted by: Paolo at July 11, 2005 9:03 AM

Like all Muslims, I'm practised at the condemnation of outrages.

Yes, and at an increasing rate we non-Muslims are becoming practiced at recognizing taqiyya when we see it coming from the "practiced" Muslims around us. So condemn away and don't be surprised when we non-Muslims just put a new label with the word "taqiyya" on our BS filters.

Posted by: Hulegu Khan at July 11, 2005 9:08 AM

Like all Muslims, I'm practised at the condemnation of outrages.

Yes, and at an increasing rate we non-Muslims are becoming practiced at recognizing taqiyya when we see it coming from the "practiced" Muslims around us. So condemn away and don't be surprised when we non-Muslims just put a new label with the word "taqiyya" on our BS filters.

Posted by: Hulegu Khan at July 11, 2005 9:09 AM

"Like all Muslims, I'm practised at the condemnation of outrages"

because we commit a lot of outrages to practise on.

I usually restrain my urge to make bitchy comments but there goes a woman who needs a veil over her face to give her the illusion of desirability, if ever there was. She must be the origin of every rude joke about Welshmen and sheep.

Posted by: Granny Weatherwax at July 11, 2005 9:26 AM

It is sad when we have to resort to name calling and other gross outbursts in order to get our point across. I find it sad that a woman with the brain power to write uses this to write about something she really has no understanding of. If she would put her brain power to use and discern the difference in what the koran teaches and the truth of the word of GOD just think of what she could accomplish. I looked at the list of woman in the link posted and realized that most of the woman, are very learned and well read, yet cannot see the falsehood of the religion they are following. I do not understand. GOD Bless.

Posted by: FHC at July 11, 2005 10:23 AM

The only thing is that one cannot predict the "muslimness" of a muslim.

As Robert Spencer says, "Islam is not a monolith". So I propose that the majority of muslims can be broadly divided into 4 categories, not intended to be exhaustive but here goes:
1. The Nominal Muslims
2. The Content Muslims
3. The Guilt-ridden Muslims
4. The Fundamentalists

The Nominal Muslim
The nominal muslim is the one who is muslim in name only. He has been brought up by liberal-minded muslim parents. Gainfully employed for the most part; well educated in the ways of the world. May attend the occasional Friday or Eid prayer at the Mosque, preferably not the Finsbury one. These guys, they'll drink beer; they'll mix with women; they'll not feel guilty about it. Just like any other Londoner, except with a Muslim-sounding name.

The Content Muslim
Many muslims are content living the way they are, with minimal involvement with what mosques have been preaching, etc. Most of these follow the peaceful (yet restrictive) precepts of Islam (such as abstention from alcohol, unwed sex, pork, etc.) and thus fear no divine retribution. While they do not even wish participate physically in the Jihad, these numerous faithful do drop an untraceable pound sterling or five into the platter every Friday at the Finsbury. These are the ones who will quake with fear of "backlash and bigoted attacks" by non-muslims after their more fundamentalist brethren blow up stuff. They will not lash back at the perpetrators of the bombings and their ideology, because they know that no such recourse to be found in Islamic text and history which would refute the fundamentalist ethos. They are secure in their own doublethink (Islam is a RoP) and in the ignorance of their non-muslim compatriots. They are not actively involved in "Da'wa", proselytisation. However, they remain apologists, simply because their doublethink is perfected to Orwellian standards.

The Guilt-ridden Muslim
This type loves his beer and his strippers too much (think Atta!). He knows it's wrong per religious dictum. This is because he has been brought up by sanctimoniously religious parents, but has fallen into the "wrong crowd", viz, the nominal muslims, the party-ers and beer drinkers and Infidel Londoners. But he enjoys the party life too much. He starts by thinking that if he can attend Friday prayers he'll "absolve" himself. The guilt from his upbringing continues to eat at him, because he knows that this rationalisation is not valid. Prgressively, by and by, attending sermons at Finsbury and the like, reading the Qur'an literally ... he ultimately adopts Jihad, because he has been taught (as all muslims are) that a "martyr" will go to heaven. So while he might not begin by physically practicing all the religious duties, he has found an "out" for his salvation -- Jihad.

The Fundamentalist
These are the type that become what they are from divers routes. Some are brought up by rigourously muslim parents and are taught at the Deobandi-like institutions. They do not exclude any portion of Islam that would make Muslims. They train to be imams (prayer-leaders) and khateebs (sermon dispensers). They populate mosques and hold steadfast to the precept of Islamic dominion.
Others among these could be guilt-ridden muslims who ultimately "get religion" and turn into fundamentalists. Also some content, well-educated muslims, in search for "deeper meaning" after some life-event may degenerate to fundamentalism.
They are marked by their adherence to the 5 daily Salat-prayers and exhorting their fellow coreligionists to adhere to same. Their appearances are often in accordance with Islamic custom, such as being bearded and in Eastern/Arab attire with skullcaps. However there are others that are more outwardly westernized while retaining their beliefs while practicing taqiyyah or religious deception to lure potential converts.

Well, it is difficult to tell when a nominal or content Muslim might suddenly have that trip-switch go off in his head that turns him into one of the latter two categories.

There is a tiny minority (heh heh, savour the irony) however, for whom a light switch goes off, in another way, and they either apostasize or, as in my case, decide to stop indulging in doublethink and reject and repudiate the violent portions of the Qur'an, Hadith and Seerah. An even tinier minority of these are vocal. For good reason. Few of those who are vocal reveal their identities for fear of bodily harm. Those that do have some sort of bodyguard/protection.

Posted by: Jsingleton at July 11, 2005 12:11 PM

Jsingleton

Great post. Are you a former muslim?

To clarify, do you reject just the violent portions of the Koran etc, or do you reject Islam itself?

Posted by: Voltaire at July 11, 2005 12:20 PM

Another thing, why should we care about the sensitivities of a religion which calls for the killing of those who no longer believe in it?

It's like caring about the feelings of mafia members.

Posted by: Voltaire at July 11, 2005 12:26 PM

"As Muslims we decode what lies behind these messages."

I always suspected that muslims were excellent cryptologers...The entire Quran and Hadith are written in Allahic code and only the superior intelligence of muslims can decipher it.
On the other hand, I thought that Allah was straight forward in his meanings, and no deciphering was necessary. Hidden meanings between the lines? No wonder muslims keep saying kafirs just dont understand Islam...we need one of those ww2 code breaking machines and run the Quran through it...then we might understand... or something like that...

Posted by: duh_swami at July 11, 2005 12:48 PM

Voltaire,
I identify myself as a muslim who repudiates the violence in its texts and history and yet acknowledges its existence. As such, by the muslims' definition, I'm not a muslim then, because for them it's all or nothing. But then, by that token there are no true muslims.

So, I'm not sure about what my true denominational identity would be. But I'm not confused about what I believe in. I'm partly secular humanist but with a belief that God exists, or as Voltaire put it -- if he did not, we would have to invent him.

Cheers!

Posted by: Jsingleton at July 11, 2005 3:00 PM

Voltaire,
I identify myself as a muslim who repudiates the violence in its texts and history and yet acknowledges its existence. As such, by the muslims' definition, I'm not a muslim then, because for them it's all or nothing. But then, by that token there are no true muslims.

So, I'm not sure about what my true denominational identity would be. But I'm not confused about what I believe in. I'm partly secular humanist but with a belief that God exists, or as Voltaire put it -- if he did not, we would have to invent him.

Cheers!

Posted by: Jsingleton at July 11, 2005 4:10 PM

"After each atrocity, the Muslim community holds it breath and waits for the backlash."

Isn't that the nub of the matter? The Muslim community sits back, 'holds its breath' and pretends Islam has nothing to do with this Islamic terrorism. They have it rigged so that Muslims victimize their host society, and then ANY reaction to the atrocity, real or imagined, is depicted as furtherance of the Muslim allegation of Western intolerance and 'Islamophobia...' This is a win-win for the Muslims, and a lose-lose for Non-Muslims. By these methods, Islamic terrorist actions, and any reaction the West has to them only furthers the Islamist agenda by morphing non-Muslims into 'anti-Muslims' if the non-Muslims object to ANYTHING the Muslims do or don't do...

They BETRAY western tolerance and openness by their actions... as well as their inactions. I am sorry to appear insensitive, but we must no longer listen to their inevitable complaints or allegations in the aftermath of any counter measure we take in countering their jihad. It's time to face the reality that Muslim responses to terrorism are completely inverse to what is required.... I for one am running out of patience...

Posted by: jsla at July 12, 2005 2:42 PM

I am surprised at the way British politicians like their counterparts in India are bending their backs to please traitors in their respective countries to get a few votes but in the process endangering the entire country. This process has being going on in India ever since independence and we used to think that Indians are corrupt and I am very surprised how the western world is tolerating such attacks on their own soil. These Pakistanis come to Britain because they want to enjoy a better standard of living and in turn give you back bomb blasts and terrorism and even rape your women. Infact I believe you all should also pass a fatwa warning white women against marrying muslims. I hope that the western world regains its senses and is able to fight this onslaught of fundamentalism which is the very nature of islam and its prophet. The Prophet of Terror and Religion of Peace.

Posted by: Afzal at July 13, 2005 12:13 PM