Islamic Truths

Insightful must read written by a Muslim. In, of all places, the LA Times (I think it's the first time I've sourced them) here;

ANOTHER WEEK, another Muslim country burns in rage over months-old Danish cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) in an unflattering light.  [...]

  I am an American by birth and a Muslim by faith. For many of my American friends, I am a voice of reason in a sea of Islamist darkness, while many Muslims have called me an "Uncle Tom" for ingratiating myself with the vested interests they seek to destroy through their violence. Mostly, though, I try not to ignore the harsh realities the followers of my religion are often unwilling to face. [...]

The first truth is that most Muslim ideologues are hypocrites. What has Osama bin Laden done for the victims of the 2004 tsunami or the shattered families who lost everything in the Pakistani earthquake last year? He did not build one school, offer one loaf of bread or pay for one vaccination. And yet he, not the devout Muslim doctors from California and Iowa who repair broken limbs and lives in the snowy peaks of Kashmir, speaks the loudest for what Muslims allegedly stand for. He has succeeded in presenting himself as the defender of Islam's poor, and the Western media has taken his jihadist message all the way to the bank.

The hypocrisy only starts there. Muslims and Arabs have done pitifully little to help improve the capacity of the Palestinian people to be good neighbors to their Israeli brethren. [...]

The second truth — one that the West needs to come to grips with — is that there is no such human persona as a "moderate Muslim." You either believe in the oneness of God or you don't. You either believe in the teachings of his prophet or you don't. You either learn those teachings and apply them to the circumstances of life in the country you have chosen to live in, or you shouldn't live there.

 

[...]But to look at angry Islam's reaction on television each night forces the question of what might be possible if all the lost energy of thousands of rioting Muslims went into the villages of Aceh to rebuild lost homes or into Kashmir to construct schools.

[...] They know they are losing the ideological struggle for hearts and minds, for life in all its different dimensions, and so they prepare themselves, and us, for Armageddon by starting fires everywhere in a display of Islamic unity intended to galvanize the masses they cannot feed, clothe, educate or house.

This is not Islam. And the faster its truest believers stand up and demonstrate its values and principles by actions, not words, the sooner a great religion will return to its rightful role as guide for nearly a quarter of humanity.

Comments

[elvis]

Lest a fatwa be issued against the writer of this article he says [in your bold type] that the little jihad must be waged in the host country. Oneness with Allah is defined by submission to it. There is is no other choice.

Also:

The West would win a lot of hearts and minds if it only showed Islam as it really is — telling the story, for example, that the prophet Muhammad was one of the great commodity traders of all time because he based his dealings on uniquely Muslim values,

So there were Muslim values before the time of Muslims? Which he goes on to clarify by saying

or that the reason he had multiple wives was not for the sake of sex but to give proper homes to the children of women made widows during a time of war.

Then Islam is the rationale for murdering in order to increase the population of said Islam by using multiple wives of competing tribes and nations as baby makers. Who does this guy think he's kidding? As he said there are no moderate Muslims. It follows then that other than hegemonic Mulims there are only enlightened ex-Muslims.

[Francis W. Porretto]

"This is not Islam," eh? So when may we expect a new edition of the Qur'an, without all that nasty stuff about smiting the unbeliever and forcing him into submission?

Islam is a program for the conquest and subjugation of the whole world and everyone in it. "Moderate Muslim" is, indeed, a contradiction in terms; there's nothing moderate about a creed that exhorts its followers to present unbelievers with a three-way choice of conversion, subjugation, or death. Yet Muhammad prescribed exactly that, in Allah's name, and no Islamic scholar has dared to rescend that "fatwa."

[Rob]

When Mr. Ijaz talks I listen. He can be found occasionally on TV and in opinion pieces like this one here.
He is the real deal.
Clearly a solid Muslim, and a friend
of the West. He is also a man of peace,
having worked on trying to settle the potentially nuclear confrontation between India and Pakistan.
He is the antithesis of the killers that have
been enabled by the extremists and Saudi money.
Thoughtful and direct and with an unusual point of view, he is a valuable intelectual resource.

[wennejunk]

Although the article is encouraging, the author still doesn't condemn the violence that seems to be becoming the norm for Islamic expression.

He writes, "You either believe in the oneness of God or you don't. You either believe in the teachings of his prophet or you don't. You either learn those teachings and apply them to the circumstances of life in the country you have chosen to live in, or you shouldn't live there."

OK.

I say:

-You either believe it is wrong to saw someone's head off with a knife ...or you don't
-You either believe it is wrong to strap a bomb to your body and walk into a movie theatre ...or you don't
-You either believe non-believers in your faith have basic human rights...or you don't.

The list of black and white can grow quite long, but the point should be clear.

I'll keep on looking

limegate.blogspot.com

[daryl]

No doubt that the jihadists, suicide bombers, and caliphate restorers have ample Quranic authority to rely on. But all this Scriptural proof that Islam is a horrible psychopathic religion, does not impress me in the slightest, and I would describe myself as a militant Christian.

Why?

1. Historically there have been horrible psychopathic Christian movements like the Radical Anabaptists of the Muenster Insurrection. You don't think those guys were quoting the Quran, do you?

2. Because in the Christian Scriptures there is undeniable and obvious support for slavery. Yet no Christian Church or denomination today endorses slavery. Why cannot the same disjuncture exist in Islam? It actually has historically. Examples: the Sufis, the abangan, or the Medlevis, all peaceful, major, and ancient traditions within Islam.

3. Christians have quoted Scripture to justify war, segregation, enslavement, even Communism. So that by your count the Quran has more passages justifying the same evils does not bother me. Most Christians and Moslems alike have worked their way around those passages. And some haven't. So go cast the first stone.

This guy in LA sounds sincere. Why deride his beliefs? They are likely as authentically Islamic as are those of the salafist loonies. There are undoubtedly others like him. We can get along.

Saudi and Iranian money tipping the balance in favor of the extremists is the big problem.

Our government needs to do three things:

1. "Ask" our Islamic friends in the war on Terror, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Pakistan, to shut down the extremist madrassas and silence the extremist clerics. They should be easy to find. They are the ones with the biggest mouths.

2. Tell the Saudis to stop training and exporting Wahhabi missionaries, and to send money and Qurans instead to the poor Moslem countries.

3. Start bombing Iran today until they beg us, not Allah, for mercy.

This Ahmidinejab is no different than Hitler. He is dead serious about what he is saying. The problem is us. Just like Old Europe with Hitler, we refuse to believe he could possibly mean all the unhinged and awful things he is saying.

Sure, a war with Iran today will create BIG problems. But not as big as if we wait until he has "wiped Israel off the map."

Pray for Peace.

darylfs

[elvis]

darylfs-

Yes, in the past Christians have cited Scripture in support of war. B U T the Quran was specifically written as a justification for hegemony.

The article itself was the typical nebulous ambivalence of the so-called moderates, despite sounding sincere -- just right in appealing to the appeasers who could wring the nuance out of it. Yet it is a fruitless endeavor in trying to apply logic when dissecting the arguments of Muslims or even debating them. They say one thing and always mean another. That anyone keeps falling for their dog and pony show would be incredulous if weren't for the reliance on the diversity and moral equivalence beliefs of the leftards.