“Islamist extremist” is itself a phrase that attempts to distance Islam from the violence perpetrated in its name and in accord with its teachings. So is “Radical Islam.” But as far as Esam Omeish is concerned, any speech that suggests that there is any connection between Islam and jihad violence must be stigmatized and silenced. This is the clearest example yet of how the New Zealand massacre is being exploited in order to shut down any criticism, no matter how mild, of jihad terrorism and Sharia oppression of women and others.
“U.S. Islamist Leader Calls for Stigmatizing Words He Calls ‘Islamophobic,'” by John Rossomando, IPT News, March 20, 2019:
Anyone who uses terms including “jihadist,” “violent jihad,” “Islamist terrorism” or “Islamic extremist” is a hater who deserves to be shunned, an influential Muslim political leader argues.
Esam Omeish issued this call Friday on Facebook, in the emotional wake of the Christchurch mosque massacre in New Zealand.
Omeish is a board member at the Dar al-Hijrah Islamic Center in Falls Church, Va., which has exhibited Muslim Brotherhood sympathies. He previously served as president of the Muslim American Society (MAS), which prosecutors say was established as the “overt arm” of the Muslim Brotherhood in America.
“Anyone who uses the following terms is Islamophobic and must stop their hate,” Omeish said.
Memo to the Palestinian Islamic Jihad and other terrorist groups which have “jihad” in their name: Esam Omeish thinks you hate Muslims.
“Violent jihad” is a fairly clinical term used by prosecutors in cases like the Boston Marathon bombing, a domestic terrorism plot in North Carolina and al-Shabaab supporter Zachary Chesser.
His list of telltale words and phrases also a bit surprising, given that Omeish’s 2000 praise for Palestinians who chose “the jihad way” to liberation, captured on video by the Investigative Project on Terrorism, led him to resign from a state immigration committee in 2007.
Other statements Omeish now sees as inherently hateful include “Islam hates us,” “Islam is not a religion,” and ban “Shariah law.”
“Islamophobia kills!”, he wrote. “Enough of this hate and Islamophobia!
Granted, his comments came as the world learned of the horrific terrorist attack that killed 50 Muslims during prayer at two New Zealand mosques.
But Omeish, even in an emotional state, may not be the best messenger to call people out for hate.
In addition to praising “the jihad way,” he also mourned Hamas founder Sheikh Ahmed Yassin in 2004 after Israel assassinated him saying, “It is our tax dollars that have killed our beloved Sheikh Ahmed Yassin.”
He wrote an open letter to President Obama in February 2016 urging support for the Mujahideen Shura Council of Derna against the secular militia leader Khalifa Haftar. But the council has ties to al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), as a Libyan al-Qaida supporter wrote in a 2015 treatise called “Sorry O’ you Claimed ‘Islamic State’ in Libya.”
Jinxmim says
So what are we supposed to call it? What we should have always been calling it. Islam.
mortimer says
Islamism is Islam when applied as a system of governance (‘DEEN’). Islamism is the full-throttle application of Sharia law that we saw in the Taliban in Afghastlistan and in ISIS in Syria and Iraq.
Most Muslims today are practicing ISLAM-à-la-carte or pick-and-choose cafeteria Islam where they loosely follow some requirements of Sharia while flagrantly avoiding other more difficult requirements of Sharia.
35% of Muslims are cultural Muslims, barely believing or practicing Islam, and another 50% hardly attend the mosque at all. Only 15% of Muslms are serious about it.
Laxity in Islam should be punished by death according to Mohammed.
gravenimage says
Mortimer wrote:
Islamism is Islam when applied as a system of governance (‘DEEN’). Islamism is the full-throttle application of Sharia law that we saw in the Taliban in Afghastlistan and in ISIS in Syria and Iraq.
………………………..
Mortimer, Islamism is not really different from Islam.
More:
Most Muslims today are practicing ISLAM-à-la-carte or pick-and-choose cafeteria Islam where they loosely follow some requirements of Sharia while flagrantly avoiding other more difficult requirements of Sharia.
35% of Muslims are cultural Muslims, barely believing or practicing Islam, and another 50% hardly attend the mosque at all. Only 15% of Muslms are serious about it.
………………………..
Even some Shari’ah is generally pretty appalling.
And it is actually a large percentage of Muslims, even in the West, who say they want to see the imposition of Shari’ah law. This is *not* a small minority of Muslims.
Even in the US, the figure is over 50%.
Even support for horrors such as stoning women to death are disturbingly high.
Here’s is Pew’s disturbing poll numbers on Muslims and their support for Shari’ah world wide:
https://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-beliefs-about-sharia/
More:
Laxity in Islam should be punished by death according to Mohammed.
………………………..
This is true. And all too many Muslims are intent on enforcing the same.
Wellington says
Excellent post, gravenimage. I respect mortimer a lot but the distinction between Islamism and Islam is a distinction without a difference.
As for Sharia, I actually would prefer a far greater percentage of Muslims would put the whole nine yards of it into practice, that way I think far more kuffaars would realize just how rotten Islam truly is. Those so-called moderate Muslims give cover to Islam, rather the way the French and Italian Communist parties gave some cover to Marxism during the Cold War.
Raja says
Wellington and Gravenimage,
Your posts just about summarises the evil intend of Islam.
Mortimer the great needs to remember that Islamism is a word coined by Left to show the non-existent “good” parts of Islam. Hope he doesn’t fall into their trap.
gravenimage says
Thanks, Wellington and Raja.
Wellington, I take your point re the imposition of Shari’ah as a object lesson for Infidels as to what Muslim rule *really* means; I only stick at wanting to see more Shari’ah in Dar-al-Islam because of the increased burden of human suffering it would engender.
And Raja, Islamism used to be used pretty much interchangeably with Islam. I understand Mortimer using it to mean “political Islam” or “Shari’ah”–that is, applied Islam– but what muddies the water in its use is that it is also used to mean “extremism”, when it is actually just orthodox Islam.
Even finding the language with which to clearly and honestly discuss Islam is complicated at times–and this does not even take into account whitewash, denial, and–as here–demands that we not be allowed to speak about the threat of Islam at all.
CRUSADER says
Might we say that if the USA has 2% Muslims, then 15% of that being devout enough to go full more SHARIAH and support JIHAD amounts to a large number of seditious traitors?
Figure is approximately:
If 2% of USA population represents 6.9 million Muslims….
…then 15 % of that figure is: 1 million Muslims.
(Even 1% of USA population represents as many as 3.45 million Muslims, or 500k Muslims)
That’s a whole lot of animosity toward the US Constitution!
Just 2 CongressMuslimas have already caused a ruckus.
CRUSADER says
Now, let’s call that devout amount as ISLAMISTs, adhering to what Bill Warner calls an ideology against our political system.
Let’s leave that as it may….
The rest of the Muzzies are cultural/folk/liberalized Muslims, most of whom would jump the fence over to the devout side of things…
So, Islam is a frightful aspect here in America.
gravenimage says
It’s worse than that though, CRUSADER–more than half of Muslims in the US openly admit they want the imposition of Shari’ah here. Here is Robert Spencer at FrontPage Magazine:
“51% OF U.S. Muslims Want Sharia”
https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/260473/51-us-muslims-want-sharia-robert-spencer
And “60% of Muslim-Americans under 30 who told Pew Research they’re more loyal to Islam than America”.
And real numbers are probably higher, since I imagine some Muslims might be cagey about admitting this, knowing that most Infidels would be concerned about this. But even these figures are terribly alarming.
And you are right that even most lax Muslims will stick with their more pious coreligionists when it comes time to take a stand.
Demsci says
“Most Muslims today are practicing ISLAM-à-la-carte or pick-and-choose cafeteria Islam where they loosely follow some requirements of Sharia while flagrantly avoiding other more difficult requirements of Sharia.
35% of Muslims are cultural Muslims, barely believing or practicing Islam, and another 50% hardly attend the mosque at all. Only 15% of Muslms are serious about it.”
And how do Muslims leftist allies portray Islam? Well, they say: “THE Islam does not exist”. Meaning that Islam is practiced in many different ways, in many different places.
And most Western people buy this explanation. And as a result nice Muslims are excused and defended against Islam-critics. Islam itself is also defended. Almost nothing Islam critics say gets through. To almost nobody. The eternal response is like that of Ben Affleck: “Do not tar all Muslims with the same brush!” Do not “stereotype”.
THAT TOO is truism, just like it is a truism that there is no real distinction between Islamism or radical Islam and (just) Islam.
And this begs the question: these many lukewarm Muslims and many Leftist defenders of Muslims along with all those who believe apologists of Islam are they not CONFUSED?
Then the question can become: their is this huge difference between message and interpretation, by Muslims, leftists and countless lay people, to which is this to blame? To the confusing message or its confused interpreters?
Suppose much confusion is to blame to the message. And to the lack of authoritative leaders of Islam that can enforce correct interpretation of texts that are, after all, fixed and finite.
Such leaders should have the authority to officially throw out dissenters so that clarity is maintained. But instead dissenters can say what they want and are indeed forbidden to leave the religion altogether.
If saying that Islam is UNCLEAR seems to soft, we could instead consider that precisely an UNCLEAR message is the most dangerous, precisely because the beneficial or neutral or trivial explanations do obscure the very real, very apparent, violent, supremacist interpretations of Islam (that is parts of its sacred texts).
So perhaps we could USE the numbers Mortimer presents and the apologist narrative as the fault of the Islamic message. Thereby withdrawing the respect for any ability of clarity of Mohammed, or the Quran, and thereby asserting that the claim of divine authorship is an insult to Allah.
Demsci says
Once we assert that Islam is very imperfect, unclear, not divine, but manmade, we can contrast Islam with democratic laws.
These are supposed to be clear, but even if they get too much interpreted and practiced in a different disagreeable way, they can get updated, scrapped, amended, by authoritative legislators. Acknowledged experts determine the meant meaning of the laws, which are in fixed finite texts.
Compared to that Islam is a rigid, obsolete mess.
Demsci says
And to Esam Omeish we can counter: Most of those words you want us to abandon? Why, we don’t need them, we just put it to the world that Islam is/ has a confused, confusing message. Muslims are to be pitied to take so much guidance from Islam as they do. Instead of issue hate we issue contempt.
Demsci says
Contempt for Islam, respect for Muslims
windrush48 says
It is astounding that those who HATE others the most tend to paint “Truth” as “hate”.
gravenimage says
Because they most benefit from this if they can get good people to swallow this claptrap.
smoris says
I have to agree with this imam. We should stop using words like “exstremist” when we talk about Islam and Muslims. The truth is that to be Muslim one must by definition be “extremist”. Using the word actually makes the false assumption that there are true Muslims who are NOT “extremist”. As with the mellow Muslims who lived for years in San Bernardino and accepted baby shower gifts from the co-workers they then massacred, one does not know when they will feel called upon to become “extreme” in their behavior. They are extreme in their social pressure – in our schools and in the public forum – already. We are expected to have our own culture and beliefs give way and promote Islam as it is. This is all extreme! We don’t recognize its extreme nature because we are living in a virtual sea of it. I welcome the honesty here. No – don’t use the word “extreme” unless you are an apologist for Islam itself.
gravenimage says
Unfortunately, this Muslim leader is not objecting to the term “Islamist extremism” because it is not accurate enough, but because it is too close to the truth.
Kilfincelt says
The practitioners of Islam kill and have killed many more people than any so-called Islamophobe has. Denial of the truth about the ideological roots of Islam, jihad, and Mohammad kill. Of course, as most of us know who read the various articles on this site, Islamophobe was a fake word created by the Muslim Brotherhood to silence critics of Islam and prevent any real debate.
mortimer says
‘Islamophobia’ is nothing more than a GASLIGHTING smear … falsely claiming that morally fine and mentally well people are evil and insane.
Slandering one’s neighbor is MORALLY EVIL. People who use the ISLAMOPHOBIA word in this facile way are MORALLY EVIL SLANDERERS.
gravenimage says
+1
Jaladhi says
So to call a terrorist a terrorist is hateful and terroristphobic!!! That is Islamic logic!
mortimer says
If Islam were truly peaceful, then all ISLAMIC EXTREMISTS would be EXTREMELY PEACEFUL. They are extremely violent.
underbed cat says
That makes total sense. Islam teaches a peculiar type of tolerance, when they can tolerate violence, stranger yet is keeping a clam face, showing no hint of nervousness when they tell the public this fabrication that has been perfected and structured enforced once again by threats of violence from the” special group.”
gravenimage says
True, Mortimer.
Wellington says
Screw that. I’m prepared to use all those words and many others (e.g., asserting that the character of Mohammed is that of a brutal, narcissistic psychopath).
Islam is wretched (there’s another word to accurately describe Mo’s creed—“wretched”). I’m sure I will come up with many more words to characterize Islam, not being due to that fake word, “Islamophobia,” but rather due to another neologism, “Islamonausea.”
gravenimage says
Spot on, Wellington. Muslims like this one want to shut us up in saying anything critical of the horrors of Islam–just as it is under Shari’ah law.
Wellington says
Indeed, gravenimage. One “right” devout Muslims enthusiastically endorse is the right to shut up about Mo’s warped creed.
gravenimage says
And not just to shut up about it themselves, but to try to force us to do the same.
JW_Reader says
Islam is not a religion. Muslim Extremism, AKA Islamic Extremism, Islamic violence, Jihad, Muslim Terrorists, Islamic terrorism, poses most danger to the modern society. These has also been responsible for millions of lives lost over the last fourteen centuries. These are the most pressing issues and must addressed at every opportunity.
gravenimage says
Islam is a religion–it is an evil religion. It is also a violent ideology.
mortimer says
Sharia law in DISGUISE is still Sharia law in action. Taqiyya is VERBAL JIHAD used to deceive and HOODWINK the dirty kafirs into somnolence while ISLAMIC SUPREMACISM goes ahead according to the STRATEGIC PLANS of the Muslim Brotherhood for North America.
So, any and all criticism of Islam is ‘HARAM’ and under Sharia law, all criticism of Islam cannot be forgiven but always receives a death sentence, with or without a fatwa.
Islam truly is a death cult, since the death penalty applies to far to many offenses that are trivial.
The Western Leftards are sponsoring the advance of Sharia fatwas by their complicity and by condoning Sharia blasphemy law.
mortimer says
Omeish commands ‘OTHERS’ to stop their hate, but will Muslims stop the HATE of AL WALAA WAL BARAA … Islam’s official teaching that Muslims must directed hatred against dirty kafirs.
-“The doctrine of al Walaa wal Baraa is the REAL IMAGE for the actual practice of this faith.” – source “Al Walaa wal Baraa According to the Aqeedah of the Salaf”, by Sheikh Muhammad Saeed al Qatani, authoritative Saudi Sharia lawyer and imam at the Abu Bakr and Al Furqan Mosques in Mecca. – https://islamfuture.wordpress.com/2009/08/20/al-wala-wal-bara-according-to-the-aqeedah-of-the-salaf-parts-123/
-Shaykh Ahmad ibn ‘Atiq said:
“There isn’t in the Book of Allah the Exalted – after the issue concerning the obligation of tawheed and the forbiddance of its opposite (kufr=wrong belief)- any issue which has as so many proofs, nor so clearly explained, than the issue of al-walaa’ and al-baraa’.” (W-B is ‘Islamic apartheid’)
– Dr. Muhammad Saeed Al-Qahtaani said: “Thus, it is clear that Al-Wala’ Wal-Bara calls on Muslims to “love” their fellow Muslims and hate the non-Muslim (or Kafir).”
– from Sufi scholar Ahmad Sirhindi (1564-1624): “The honour of Islam lies in INSULTING kufr and kafirs. One who respects the kafirs dishonours the Muslims… The real purpose of levying jiziya on them is to HUMILIATE them to such an extent that they may not be able to dress well and to live in grandeur. They should constantly remain TERRIFIED and TREMBLING. It is intended to hold them under CONTEMPT and to uphold the honour and might of Islam.”
– from ibn Taymiyya, “Book of Emaan”: “… true believers show ANIMOSITY and HATRED towards disbelievers and NEVER support them.”
– from Umar Sulayman ‘Abd-Allaah al-Ashqar, “Belief in Allah”: “The Muslim should regard the Kuffaar as ENEMIES and HATE them because of their kufr (wrong belief), just as he hates their kufr (disbelief) itself.”
– from [Chap.iv] “The Islaamic Concept of al-Walaa’ wal-Baraa’” by Khalid El-Gharib: “… to SHOW ENMITY to those who show enmity to Allaah and His Messenger”.
(Note: Muslims are to visibly demonstrate their ENMITY or HATRED towards the kufaar)
MESSAGE TO OMEISH: How about it, sport? Will you renounce the HATE of AL WALAA WAL BARAA? Or not?
CRUSADER says
Nazis in 1930s Germany would’ve wanted to say the same thing:
“Don’t use ‘fascists’ or ‘extremists’ as words to describe us! We are only following our Great Leader…
and we mean to bring peace to the whole world by our ideology….”
gravenimage says
It sounds crazy, but there was actually a lot of press claiming that all Hitler wanted was peace.
somehistory says
On his list is “hate kills.” Also on his list is the “phobia kills.” He says anyone saying these must stop.
In the body of the article is this: ““Islamophobia kills!”, he wrote” Therefore, according to his evil thinking of what all should be “stopped,” he breaks his own rules. He put it on the list, but then absolutely ***had*** to use it to try to make his point. A falsehood if ever there existed falsehoods. moslims kill. It isn’t the reporting on it, or talking about it, or hating it that kills. moslims do the killing due to their adherence to islam.
He has no actual authority to tell anyone what they can and cannot say or write. He’s like a banty rooster, (sorry Banty roosters everywhere) strutting about, ordering people to stop telling the Truth. He is not ruler of the barnyard and the rest of us don’t have to do as he orders. Turn a water hose on this ‘rooster’ and show him he needs to cool off in the corner until he can behave himself.
islam teaches killing. It is more than due a whole lot of hate. It is immoral and its code is not “law” but lawlessness codified. It needs and deserves to be destroyed as a product of satan the devil. And it will be destroyed.
FYI says
So this guy wants to hide the truth about islam..
islam’s “prophet” muhammed,a mass-murdering{Abu Dawud 4390}Liar{al tabari 6:111}
“I have been made victorious through TERROR”
Bukhari 4:52:220
islam’s subversive agenda..
“In the muslim community,holy war is a RELIGIOUS DUTY,
because of the universalism of the muslim mission and the obligation
to CONVERT everybody to islam either by PERSUASION OR FORCE”
Ibn Khaldun{muqqadimah}
“To convert everybody by persuasion or force”
THAT is the real reason muslims want to shut down the Truth about islam’s subversive agenda,which, aided by the Left in the RED-GREEN AXIS is busy all over the world undermining freedom and democracy.
somehistory says
If a moslim commits his terror and the only witness to this is murdered, so no one but the moslim murderer (and God) know about it, is it still the result of islam? Is it still a moslim committing jihad? Is it still “hatred” of another by the moslim murderer?
If a tree falls in the forest and no human is there to witness it, does it still fall and make a noise, disturb the earth and scatter debris?
Talking about moslims killing doesn’t make them kill. Not talking about moslims killing just makes it easier on moslims to kill.
Talk about it. Write about it. Shout it out to all who can hear. islam is evil and islam, through its adherents, kills, rapes, lies, disrupts, causes strife, causes stress. islam has no redeeming qualities, no virtue, absolutely no good whatsoever.
islam is a menace to humankind. islam is demonic. islam is a “wild beast” created by satan.
Raja says
Somehistory,
You are absolutely right. Exposing any evil is our right and let us shout from rooftops that Islam is evil. Even Satan would not like that situation.
Islam has already conquered the hearts of the foolish and NOW THEY ARE DEMANDING FREE PASS FOR ISLAM to take its hateful and genocide agenda to next level.
alex reid says
An Islamophobe is deemed to be an individual with an irrational fear of Islam & Muslims. The correct definition would & should be: “A person who is a non-Muslim who knows more about Islam than he/she should.” Islam is a Fascistic, supremacist. racist, anti-Semitic, misogynistic, enslaving,perverted political ideology that endorses rape, murder & subjugation of non-Muslims. Let there be no doubt on this. It’s all laid out in the Koran & their other texts. These b*st*rds of Apologists should be kicked out of N. America/Europe & they can live on the generous Welfare of their Islamic countries. They take over & Rule #1 will be: any criticism of Islam will be death. In the US the 1st. Amendment will disappear quicker than water off a duck’s back!
CRUSADER says
“These b*st*rds of Apologists should be kicked out of N. America/Europe & they can live on the generous Welfare of their Islamic countries.”
It may come down to that — but only when civil warring occurs.
How do you see this creeping Shariah is to get shaken down, otherwise?
Additionally, once they are ensconced in their Islamic welfare far away….
….don’t you think they will want to lob their weapons of destruction upon the Kafir countries which they cannot control? Dar al Harb — if it can’t be conquered — would have to be destroyed….
No?
gravenimage says
We should end Muslim immigration into the West *now*–and start deportations, beginning with the worst Jihadists.
According to the Samantha Bee show, with the Trump “Muslim ban” Muslim immigration to the US is now down *91%*. I applaud it if it is anywhere near that high. (Of course, she was scathingly critical of this, but I don’t much care).
Kay says
+1
gravenimage says
Thank you, Kay.
And I found the original reference:
“Trump Cut Muslim Refugees 91%”
https://www.cato.org/blog/trump-cut-muslim-refugees-91-immigrants-30-visitors-18
gravenimage says
Virginia Muslim leader says it’s “Islamophobic” and “hate” to use words such as “Islamist extremist”
………………….
So even this mild phrasing is too much for Esam Omeish–as is *any* reference that Islam and Jihad are violent, or that some of us don’t want to live under the brutal horrors of Shari’ah law.
What more do we know about Esam Omeish? Nothing good.
In 2000, Esam Omeish was among those who recommended the board of directors hire Anwar al-Awlaki as his Mosque’s imam. In 2004 Omeish said he was convinced that al-Awlaki: “has no inclination or active involvement in any events or circumstances that have to do with terrorism.”
Of course, in reality al-Awlaki was already heavily involved with Al Qaida, and he was a “spiritual adviser” to one of the 9/11 hijackers. He later inspired the Fort Hood Jihadist, as well as a slew of other Jihadists.
Esam Omeish hired Al-Awlaki to serve as the Muslim chaplain at George Washington University.
He has also tried to whitewash the Muslim Brotherhood.
That any decent people are still listening to this Muslim thug now is insanity itself.
Northern Virginiastan says
Esam Omeish placed third in a 4-way Democratic primary for the 35th District Virginia House of Delegates. Robert cautioned:
If a candidate like Esam Omeish can get 16% of the vote despite his Islamic supremacist statements and connections, imagine what a stealthier jihadist could do.
His hijabi daughter Abrar Omeish is running for an at-large seat on the Fairfax County Public School Board.
gravenimage says
Very disturbing.
rubiconcrest says
Well lets give him what he wants. Forget the all the qualifiers. Just say, ‘Islam’.
Barbara says
HATE SPEECH is to call Jews apes & pigs -, it is hate speech to encourage murdering, killing of innocent people, and to do acts of terror! Jewaphobia and Christaphobia is Hate Speech; Beheading non-Muslims and falsely labeling Jews, Catholics and Christians Blasphemers and infidels is HATE SPEECH! Speaking Anti-semitic language is HATE Speech!
Having constructive critical analysis about the political ideology of Islam is not Hate speech – it is holding Islam to account!
It is the responsible thing to do to constructively criticize other Political and Religious ideologies
Just as Islam reserves the right to criticize Judaism, Catholicism and Christianity – Non-Muslims have the same RIGHT to criticize Islam!
Just as Islam raise questions about the truth of other Faiths – they have the RIGHT to raise questions about Islam!
That is not HATE – it is applying the same accountability standards to Islam as Islam applies to other faiths!
Is it true says
Is it true that the 2 Mosques where Ahmadyya Mosques`?We all know(but not the mainsteam)that no Muslim accept Ahmadyyas as Muslims and kill them often.And now they are crying Muslims were killed?
marc says
seems unlikely as at least one of the mosques produced a convert that went to join isis (since killed). Also the pakistani cricket team was visiting, they’d have been just as likely to have visited a synagogue as amahdi are considered non human in pakistan. what evidence do you have?
gravenimage says
Pamela Geller has information on one of the Mosque’s links to Al Qaeda:
“Christchurch mosque linked to al-Qaeda”
https://gellerreport.com/2019/03/christchurch-mosque-jihad-terror.html/
That’s the Al Noor Mosque.
The other Mosque is the Linwood Islamic Centre–I haven’t been able to find out much about this Mosque, but I have not heard that it is Ahmadi.
exdemexlib says
Well, it would be interesting to beat him at his own game, and use the terminology of TROP
https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/
Let’s refer to them as the *Misunderstanders of the Religion of Peace*
And then list all the current and past *Misunderstandings*, and enter into a Public Debate with anyone defending the Muslim *migrants* , rapists, murderers, etc.
(Make sure to video it, so it can put up after the leftist crazies twisted reporting version.)
Demsci says
Absolutely, And as sarcasm of course. But the big thought behind this could be:
“See, in reality Islam is clear and essentially what ISIS and terrorists interpret it to be”
Or:
“There are misunderstanders all over the place in Islam. And among leftist apologists of Islam too. All these asserted contradicting interpretations and denials thereof” show the big potential for misunderstanding!
Of the sacred texts, fixed and finite, in Quran-Sira-Hadiths. The texts and lack of authority in interpretation and practice and also lack of updates in a 1000 years, there lies the fault!”
How is it even possible NOT to misunderstand the sacred texts? One might ask. At at least how is right understanding with consensus even possible? How is right practice without authority/ enforcement even possible? Islam is not WORKABLE. Or something along those lines.
Demsci says
Based on interpretations of Islamic sacred texts and denials and contradictions thereof. By all sorts of Muslims, be they radical or Moderate, and by all sorts of Islam apologists, like Barack Obama,
There can be made a HUGE list of contradicting interpretations, regardless whether the interpretator was genuine or lying, for he/ she is on record.
It starts with the question about all texts; is this still PRESCRIPTIVE or now only DESCRIPTIVE?
underbed cat says
If a person was tolerant and peaceful he would not tolerate the doctrine.
Oren Wysocki says
I am sure the nazis would find it convenient for them achieving their plan to conquer all non whites and make them second class citizens for their history to be illegal and hateful to discuss as well as making it illegal to call them racists just like muslims are racist, discriminating people whos ideology calls for the conquest of all non muslims. In G-d I trust.
Demsci says
Esam Omeish says: “Hate kills”. HE means that hate for all Muslims may make some non-Muslims kill Muslims, even children, indiscrimanately. HE means that all criticism on Islam and Muslims is hate speech. Is stereotyping, painting all Muslims with the same brush. Almost like racism. Although Islam is not a race.
But when the Islamic message and organization are at fault, stereotyping can be avoided and we can express the wish that more and more Muslims leave Islam and that leftists can also acknowledge problems with Islam (not as clear hate message but as unclear message interpretable as such) and support counter procedures like vetting Muslims and asking them about THEIR interpretation of Islam etc.
Robir Datta says
They are correct: indeed their behavior is even sanctioned by their scriptures. It is “Perfectly normal Islam” and should be called as such.
owensgate says
I have always disagreed with the word “Terror” describing attack. It says nothing. So let’s stop with “Terror” and name the action correctly. “ISLAMIC JIHAD ATTACK”. ‘Cause that’s EXACTLY what they are.
Mr deplorable says
Islamist extremist, Islamist extremist, Islamist extremist. I hate Islamist extremist’s. Did I get it right?