You say Islamism and I say Islam, you say Islamist and I say Islamic ... let's call the whole thing jihad!

Islamism or Islam?—Islamist or Islamic? By Dr. Andrew Bostom 

Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan (with his colleague, Iranian President Ahmadinejad): “There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam and that’s it”

 During the autumn of 1843, in the heart of Istanbul, Turkey, Sir Henry Layard ^[1], the British archeologist, writer, and diplomat, witnessed the punishment mandated by the Shari’a, i.e., Islamic Law for apostasizing from Islam. He described this abhorrent spectacle as follows:

 “An Armenian who had embraced Islamism [emphasis added] had returned to his former faith. For his apostasy he was condemned to death according to the Mohammedan [Islamic] law. His execution took place, accompanied by details of studied insult and indignity directed against Christianity and Europeans in general. The corpse was exposed in one of the most public and frequented places in Stamboul [Istanbul], and the head, which had been severed from the body, was placed upon it, covered by a European hat.”

 Layard’s narrative demonstrates how in mid-19^th century parlance, “Islamism” and “Islam” were synonymous, and meant to be equivalent to “Catholicism,” “Protestantism,” and “Judaism”—not to “radical” or “fundamentalist” sects of any of these religions.  Moreover, through at least the mid-1950s, scholars devoted to the formal study of Islamic doctrine and history were still referred to as “Islamists.”

 Turkey’s current Prime Minister Erdogan, commenting in August, 2007 ^[2] on the term “moderate Islam,” frequently used in the West to describe his ruling political party, the AKP, stated, “These descriptions are very ugly, it is offensive and an insult to our religion. There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam and that’s it.” Erdogan’s displeasure is ironic, even somewhat humorous, given the contemporary Western apologetic obsession to recast the terms “Islamism,” and “Islamist,” to denote, exclusively, “radical” or “immoderate” Islam, and its adherents. But the irony of Erdogan’s ire aside, artificial distinctions between “Islamism” and Islam, “Islamist” and Islamic are logically incoherent, obfuscating irrefragable truths about living Islamic dogma, and its modern manifestations.

 The 1990 Cairo Declaration ^[3], or “Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Islam”—not Islamism—was drafted and ratified by all the Muslim member nations of the Organization of the Islamic—not Islamist—Conference (OIC ^[4]), a 57 state collective including every Islamic nation on earth. The OIC, currently headed by Turkey’s Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu ^[4], thus represents the entire Muslim ummah (or global community), and is the largest single voting bloc in the United Nations.

 Its preamble and concluding articles (24 and 25) make plain that the OIC ^[4]’s Cairo Declaration ^[3] is designed to supersede Western conceptions of human rights as enunciated, for example, in the US Bill of Rights ^[5]. The preamble repeats a Koranic injunction affirming Islamic supremacism, (Koran 3:110 ^[6]): “Reaffirming the civilizing and historical role of the Islamic Ummah which Allah made the best nation…” The gravely negative implications of this  Islamic Law (Shari’a)-based document ^[3] (“There shall be no crime or punishment except as provided for in the Shari’a”) are most apparent in its transparent rejection of freedom of conscience in Article 10 ^[3], while articles 19 ^[3] and 22 ^[3] reiterate Shari’a principles stated throughout the document, which clearly apply to the “punishment”—death—for so-called  “apostates” from Islam.

 The Cairo Declaration ^[3]—entirely consistent with Islamic Law—also introduces unacceptable discrimination against non-Muslims and women, while sanctioning the legitimacy of dehumanizing, Shari’a-compliant punishments, from flogging, to mutilation, and stoning.

 And polling data from a rigorously conducted WorldPublicOpinion.org survey ^[7] released April, 2007 demonstrate the Cairo Declaration’s Islamic Law principles—antithetical to Western formulations of human rights—are embraced by the preponderance of the world’s Muslims. Fully 2/3 of a representative sample of 4400 Muslims from Morocco, Egypt, Pakistan, and Indonesia desired the ultimate jihad conquest imperatives: to re-create a unified supra-national Islamic state, or Caliphate, ruled by “strict application of Shari’a.”

 These quintessential goals of jihad were reiterated by the mass murdering jihadist psychiatrist Nidal Hasan as part of an erstwhile “medical grand rounds ^[8]” given on June 27, 2007. Although Hasan merely reiterates salient aspects of classical jihad theory ^[9] (i.e., see slides 35, 39, 42, 43, 44, 45,  and 49 ^[8]), this reality is understandably “shocking” to our willfully uninformed elites in the media, military, and government. Nidal Hasan’s presentation concludes, in full accord with classical Islamic doctrine regarding jihad war, (slide 49 ^[8]), “Fighting to establish an Islamic State to please Allah, even by force is condoned by (sic) Islam.”

 Unapologetic observations from 1950 by a great 20^th century “Islamist” scholar of the Shari’a, G.H. Bousquet ^[10], contextualize these ominous trends. Bousquet described Islam itself as “as a doubly totalitarian system,” which, “claimed to impose itself on the whole world and it claimed also, by the divinely appointed Muhammadan law…to regulate down to the smallest details the whole life of the Islamic community and of every individual believer.”

Comments

[ParahSalin]

It jut galls me when the media refer to someone's "personal version of Islam" as if there actually were such a thing. Those would be the same nitwits who think the Constitution is a living document.

[Revnant Dream]

Here comes the Magog war. If Turkey turns back to the East they will side with the Islamists.
Frankly with all the bordering semi-Turkish states of the old soviet Union. It was a forgone conclusion.
Turkey will be the new nucleolus they will stabilize around. Time will tell.
JMO

[Mongol]

islam is a hand grenade being swung around by the pin in a very religious manner.

[Noelegy]

I own a book that my dad got for me many years ago because of my interest in art. It's copyrighted 1933, and is called "A Child's History of Art." But because the writing isn't dumbed down, I occasionally like to get it out and reread it (it's almost 500 pages).

I found this interesting passage in the chapter about Arabian architecture. The words "Muslim" or "Islam" are never mentioned, instead the author uses the term "Mohammedan."

"The early Mohammedans did not believe in simply asking other people to become Mohammedans. They brought people into their religion by saying to them, 'Be a Mohammedan or we'll kill you.' [emphasis added] So the Mohammedan religion spread quickly from Arabia where it started, for the Arabs were great conquerors. Eastward it spread, farther and farther, through Persia and across India. Bagdad became the capital of these eastern Mohammedans. Westward the Arabs pushed across Egypt, across northern Africa till they came to the Strait of Gilbraltar. This did not stop them. They built boats and sailed across to Spain, Through Spain they spread until they got as far as France. All Europe would probably have become Mohammedan if the French had not stopped the Arabs in a battle fought at the town of Tours, in France."

I'm pretty sure that in 1933, they weren't politely asking people to join their religion, either.

[www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1591477762]

This may seem off topic but not really. It' s aimed at sarastro. I printed and really read the post we were discussing about Freemasonry and Hugo Chavez. I'm going to check up on La Sistema from a musician friend who spent some time in Caracas. With the Shabbat, no time.
But apropos this article, I want to address your love of Kemal Ataturk. Jokerman thought I was taking a swipe at maidenUSofA when I compared you but I wasn't, except to suggest you are one and the same. Now that I read your gushing words praising the butcher, I'm convinced of it. The Turks are so fearsome, that during the Korean War, the Nork's were afraid of the Turks who were there as our NATO allies.
Believe me, sarastro, Ataturk, the monster, was no JEW. It is not a Jewish value to murder 17,000,000 Armenians simply for being Armenian and refusing to become Muslims. In fact, the State of Israel has absorbed thousands of Armenians who were left stateless after the Ottomans ceded Israel to the Brits.
Nothing and I mean NOTHING can atone for such a slaughter.
Furthermore, Ataturk reneged on Balfour, creating the mess we have now, but then that was just his part of the Illuminati NWO plan inspired by your beloved Freemasons.

Why did I post this here? Because the original article is probably too far back for you to refer to it and as Pamela says, although I am paraphrasing, If it walks like a Muslim, talks like a Muslim and ACTS like a Muslim, guess what? IT'S A MUSLIM and there's nothing moderate about it.

You know that Ghadaffi, who acknowledges having a Jewish mother, has said repeatedly he has no problem with *Jews* it's the State of Israel that is his problem. You see, that Jewish soul he inherited, as much as he tries to deny it, won't let him cross certain lines. When you see a Muslim making that differentiation, look for a Jewish blood line. It is so far beyond the pale of Jewish ethics to eliminate a whole group of people just for being who Hashem made them, that we can't even believe the Torah commanded just such action against the Caananites. It's why people are trying to find "peaceful" solutions. it will take the direct intervention of Hashem himself to save us.
Oh and please don't mention Mr. Klinghofer. Ghadaffi probably never considered him a Jew. While objectively he was one, from Ghadaffi's perspective it's how the two ideas can exist simultaneously. Rationalization is an amazing thing but there you have the imperfection of humanity and none is "like a god" to use your description of one person.

I apologize to other posters if this was a bit OT but the point about Ataturk needed to be addressed.

[Sarastro]

Hello, Meira. I have spent the last several hours informing myself about your issues. This is what I have found out:

www.enotes.com/genocide-encyclopedia/ataturk-mustafa-kemal

"There is no evidence that Ataturk was in any way involved in the enactment of the World War I Armenian Genocide, either directly or indirectly." He was not put on trial. Those most responsible were Talat Pasha, Enver Pasha, Vahib Pasha, Cemal Pasha, Nazim Bey and Abdulahad Nuri, all of whom were put on trial. It seems the atrocities were mostly carried out by something called Teskilat-i Mahsusa [special organization] which consisted of 30,000 blood-thirsty men, many of whom were criminals set free from prisons. In any case, Ataturk's name did not appear in the descriptions of the attacks, nor was he accused by any Armenian.
The revolt of the Young Turks in 1908 against the authoritive regime of Sultan Abdul Hamid began among the intellectuals of Salonika. It was from there that the demand for a constitutional government arose.
Ataturk was descended from Spanish jews who were given the choice by the Catholics of converting, emigrating or being killed. They opted to emigrate, and landed in Saloniki under the Ottomans. They were given refuge, provided they become Moslems. They converted outwardly but inwardly remained Jewish, and came to be called Doenmes. Both the Moslems and the Jews considered them to be heretics.
In an interview in the Kamenitz Hotel in Jerusalem in 1911, a young Israeli reporter had a conversation with Mustafa Kemal, not yet Ataturk. He said: "I'm a descendant of Sabbetai Zevi. My opinion is that every Jew would do well to join him. I have at home a Hebrew Bible printed in Venice. It's rather old, and I remember my father bringing me to a Karaite teacher who taught me to read it.
: I can still remember a few words of it such as --- Shema Yisra'el,
Adonai Elohenu, Adonai Ehad."

Ataturk was a member of an Italian Masonic Lodge, Macedonia Resorta e Veritus.

It is for you to decide what he was, these are just facts I am providing.

[Sarastro]

An object that is aimed at someone is usually a gun; that you're aiming your remarks at me I find slightly hysterical and offensive. I think you have all your information from biased sources. You could be a little more ladylike and say maybe I don't go far enough in my condemnations or ask me to explain why I thinf thus and so. I just think that ANYONE who opposes Islam is commendable. And Ataturk said his goal was to keep Islam in the mosques and out of everything else. For me, this is foremost in connection with him.

[Jokerman]

"don't mention Mr. Klinghofer.(sic) Ghadaffi probably never considered him a Jew."

I'm related to Leon Klinghoffer. Regardless of what Mr. Gadaffi may have thought, Leon most certainly WAS a Jew. He was singled out by the PLO because he was a Jew. He was killed by the PLO because he was a Jew.

The cool thing at the time was that Reagan sent out a fighter jet and intercepted the murderers in Italy where they stood trial.

Wish we had a President like that now!

[www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1591477762]

Jokerman, no offense meant. I was thinking about some of the comments that might be made in light of the Lockerbie bomber getting out of jail. I don't know why I connected that to the Achille Lauro. I have no doubt in MY mind that Mr. Klinghofer was a Jew and that he was murdered because of it. As you know however, The Arabs unfortunately distinguish between Ashkenazi Eastern European Jews and those of us who's origins are from the Mediterranean and Middle East. Eastern Europeans who are supposedly descended from Khazars are considered to be the problem here by our enemy. That's of course a lie but that's their method of divide and conquer. I don't want to get into the whole Ashkenazi - Sephardi thing here. I'm the latter. We have a common enemy that's all that's necessary to know and as for Reagan sending a fighter jet, I wish we had a president (and a Prime minister) like that now too!

[www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1591477762]

Sasrastro, this is getting ridiculous. If Ataturk was descended from Shabbtai Zvi "yemach shemo" he was not a Jew. Zvi was an apostate of the worst order and he was excommunicated. He lost his status as a Jew. He was an evil man and he turned many of his deluded followers AGAINST true Torah Judaism. He considered himself to be Messiah. You cite no sources yet say I used biased ones. Well, yes I guess my Armenian "play aunt" whose own uncle was tortured and murdered by your hero, might be considered a "biased" source but know this, it happened in her lifetime. She had letters, first hand accounts. This is the source material genuine historians use to document such atrocities. Only you and the current president of Turkey are in denial about the Armenian Holocaust. Of course the Butcher wasn't tried, that's what fall guys are for. His Masonic masters made sure he was around to undermine Balfour so that along with Lawrence of Arabia they could double cross the Early Jewish settlers. You disgust me. Sorry, if that's not ladylike. Excessive delicacy in unseemly in the face of blatant untruth.

You don't have to tell me the history of the Sephardic Jews. I am one. And if you try to associate Ataturk with my community it is a huge insult. You are wrong about options. We had none. Prior to 1492, we were allowed to "convert" or face the Inquisitor General. When it got embarrassing to have so many of us "Secret" Jews, Conversos, going to the Auto da Fe because we were caught practicing Judaism in secret,and refused to submit to real Catholicism, Ferdinand and Isabella decreed that we must leave with nothing but what we could carry and none of our wealth. Interesting that that decree was published on TishB'Av, the anniversary of the destruction of both Temples at Jerusalem.
Spanish Jewry was prosperous and learned. Many were at Court. Nothing would move the monarchs from their decision. So please don't lecture me and tell me what we suffered. The Jewish communities of Salonika and Rhodes was almost totally obliterated in the Nazi,y"s, Holocaust.

BTW Sarastro, if you are not a Jew it is forbidden for you to say "Shema Israel" that prayer is permitted to Jews only according to our law so if you want to talk about being offended, I am.

[Jokerman]

Meira, no offense taken. . . there was nothing offensive in what you wrote and I didn't think anything about you in regard to that. Sorry if I was fuzzy about that. I was only talking about Gadaffi's viewpoint as you described and how these momser Arabs/Muslims hate Jews.

The neat thing is still, (regardless of the unbelievable disregard of life and the cowardly cruelty shown in singling out my completely inoffensive and harmless wheelchair-bound 'uncle by marriage', Leon, the Jew,) how Reagan responded.

Reagan was a mensch!

Shalom, Meira.

[Sarastro]

Meira, you do not listen, youn do not read what I say. I DID provide a source. Here is another: engforum.reavda.ru/showthread.php?p=2847265
There are many, you can look them up yourself. Here is another which I will give in its entirety:
Did Kinross suspect more than he was admitting? I would never have asked had I not recently come across a remarkable chapter while browsing in the out-of-print Hebrew aurobiography of Itamar Ben-Avi, son of Eliezar Ben-Yehuda, the leading promotor of the revival of spoken Hebrew in late 19th century Palestine. Ben-Avi, the first child to be raised in Hebrew since ancient times and later a Hebrew journalist and newspaper publisher, writes in this book of walking into the Kamenitz Hotel in Jerusalem one autumn night in 1911 and being asked by its proprietor: "Do you see that Turkish officer sitting there in the corner, the one with the bottle of arrack?"
"Yes".
"He's one of the most important officers in the Turkish army."
"What's his name?"
"Mustafa Kemal".
"I'd like to meet him", I said, because the minute I looked at him I was startled by his piercing green eyes.
Ben Avi describes two meetings with Mustafa Kemal. Both were conducted in French, were largely devoted to Ottoman politics,a dnwere doused with large amounts of arrack. In the first of these, Kemal confided:
"I'm a descendant of Sabbetai Zevi --- not a Jew anymore, but an ardent admirer of this prophet of yours. My opinion is that every Jew in this country would do well to join his camp".
During the second meeting, held 10 days later in the same hotel, Kemal said at one point: "I have at home a Hebrew Bible printed in venice. It's rather old, and I remember my father bringing me to a Karaite teacher who tayght me to read it. I can still remember a few words of it such as ---
Ben Avi continues:
"He paused for a moment,m his eyes searching for something in space. Then he recalled: "S---- Y-----, Adonai Elohenu, Adonai Ehadi!"
"That's our most important prayer, Captain."
"And my secret prayer, too, cher monsieur", he replied.
Although Itamar Ben-Avi could not have known it, Ataturk no doubt meant "secret prayer" quite literally. He had good reason for concealing his Doenme origins, as they were looked doen on as heretics by both Moslems and Jews.

[Sarastro]

This is what I found. If it is offensive to you, I am sorry. Please do not project your ill will onto me, I have nothing to do with this story. I certainly do not love Ataturk, neither do I hate him as you do, I am just searching for thr facts.
When Kemal says "descended" from Sabbetai Zevi, I think he means
"follower" of, because his family came from Spain to Saloniki, and in Saloniki was the largest concentration of Zevi's followers, about 15,000 on the eve of World War I. So, he probably became contaminated there.
I never sought to teach you anything about the history of Sephardic Jews, I never mentioned that word, why do you say that? And I certainly do not deny the slaughter of the Armenians, who were Christians, and which horrifies me. When i lived in New York City, I was acquainted with Armenians, who informed me. And your fierce antipathy regarding Masonry and condemning it for all the faults in the world is just pure ignorance. You don't know what you're talking about, you are like a wild woman ranting in an insane asylum, lashing out at people whom you regard as enemies who want to be your friend. I am not your enemy, I have lost several good friends because of my love for and partiality to Israel, and when I couldn't convonce them, I dropped them. You are full of animosity, which us not a trait of the Jews I know. In fact, I am the hot-head, and they are always calming me down. I am sorry you are offended by me. This destresses me. Shalom