Extremists should not be allowed to distort the true image of Islam

“They thrive on militancy and violence. They seek to strike terror and they kill and maim, yet they claim to serve the cause of Islam. These misguided people are found everywhere and unfortunately their number continues to swell – thanks primarily to poverty, injustice and the West’s double standard…. Terrorism, in every form and manifestation, should be condemned not by words but by action and extremists should not be allowed to distort the true image of Islam.”

Naushad Shamimul Haque opposes extremist distortions of Islam.

Arab News, 29 April 2005

Most of us would regard this as a balanced and reasoned argument. Not Robert Spencer, though. The very suggestion that poverty, injustice and double standards on the part of the West might have made a contribution to the rise of extremist Islamism reduces him to apoplexy:

“Yes, it’s all our fault. I would like to get into a little discussion of history with Naushad Shamimul Haque, and find out how he explains all those jihads that were waged by Islamic empires at a time when those empires had an overwhelming military superiority over Western non-Muslim lands. Was it poverty? Injustice? Double standards that led Muslims to conquer Egypt, Syria, Anatolia, Eastern Europe, North Africa, Spain, India, etc. etc. etc.?”

Jihad Watch, 1 May 2005

As distinct from the peace-loving, non-imperialist history of regimes adhering to Christianity, of course.

Anyone tempted to dismiss Robert Spencer’s arguments as the ravings of an isolated right-wing nutter should refer to the outcry that greeted actor Maggie Gyllenhaal’s suggestion that the US itself bore some responsibility for the 9/11 attacks.

See New York Daily News, 24 April 2005 and BBC News, 27 April 2005

For an article by one of Spencer’s co-thinkers from the US right, which actually encourages physical violence against Gyllenhaal (“massaging her scalp with a two-by-four”), see Front Page Magazine, 29 April 2005

The Islamophobes that aren’t (if you believe Stephen Schwartz)

Stephen Schwartz complains that US Muslim organisations direct wild accusations of Islamophobia against people who are entirely blameless. Who are these persecuted innocents? Schwartz offers us an example:

“Daniel Pipes of the Middle East Forum has experienced more denunciation as an ‘Islamophobe’ than any other individual in the West. Yet Pipes has never once criticized the religion of Islam per se; he has never argued that the faith of Muhammad represents any problem, but has only censured its politicization and ideologization.”

Front Page Magazine, 28 April 2005

Anyone under the illusion that this represents an accurate summary of Pipes’ position would be advised to have look through the material on Daniel Pipes collected on our site.

Robert Spencer, however, takes issue with Schwartz for even accepting that Islamophobia exists:

“Does the labeling as ‘Islamophobic’ the practice of ‘attacking the entire religion of Islam as a problem for the world’ mean that it is Islamophobic to focus attention on the Qur’an and the Sunnah of the Prophet as motivations for terrorist activity?”

Jihad Watch, 29 April 2005

Europe, radical Islam and secularism

Joe Katzman at Winds of Change expresses his admiration for Irshad Manji, who is quoted as saying: “I subscribe to Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s point that ‘Islamic terrorism, both in the Netherlands and abroad, is able to thrive because it is embedded in a wider circle of fellow Muslims’. This is a reality that most Western security experts have yet to grasp.”

Winds of Change, 28 April 2005

For the full Aspen Institute interview, see here.

So, in circumstances where right-wingers are claiming that Islamic terrorists are not a small isolated minority but have roots in the wider Muslim community, Manji announces that this view is essentially correct. And at a time when many of her fellow Muslims are campaigning against increased state repression directed at people with no record of supporting terrorism, Manji suggests that the West’s security services have underestimated the true extent of the terrorist threat. Just brilliant.

American border secrets

“What steps should Western border agencies take to defend their homelands from harm by Islamists? In the case of non-citizens, the answer is simple: Don’t let Islamists in. Exclude not just potential terrorists but also anyone who supports the totalitarian goals of radical Islam. Just as civilized countries did not welcome fascists in the early 1940s (or communists a decade later), they need not welcome Islamists today.

“But what about one’s own citizens who cross the border? They could be leaving to fight for the Taliban or returning from a course on terrorism techniques. Or perhaps they studied with enemies of the West who incited them to sabotage or sedition….. America finds itself at war with radical Islam not just in Afghanistan but in Buffalo, Boston, Boca Raton, and Baltimore. Controlling the border flow, therefore, has paramount importance.”

Daniel Pipes, the man who applauded the exclusion of Yusuf Islam (Cat Stevens) and Tariq Ramadan from the US, outlines his philosophy on border controls.

New York Sun, 26 April 2005

Fortunately, other US commentators take a different view of the suppression of Muslims’ civil liberties. See “Muslims’ lawsuit upholds liberties for all”, CAIR news brief, 26 April 2005

Or, for favourable coverage of democratic reformer Khaled Abou El Fadl, see “Are Islam and democracy compatible?”, CAIR news brief, 25 April 2005

Khaled Abou El Fadl has, of course, been denounced by Daniel Pipes as a “stealth Islamist” and is presumably exactly the sort of US citizen who deserves to suffer harassment when crossing the US border.

Middle East Quarterly, Spring 2004

‘The hypocrisy of Islam’

“Islam means peace and love and Muslims only want to be left alone to practice their beliefs – in peace. This is one of the greatest lies of the last century but many Muslims continue to say it, over and over, like a mantra, perhaps more to convince themselves than the rest of the world.”

FaithFreedom.org, 26 April 2005

Elsewhere on this revolting right-wing site an article can be found on Islam and women. It begins:

“The situation of women living in Islam-stricken societies and under Islamic laws is the outrage of the 21st century. Burqa-clad and veiled women and girls, beheadings, stoning to death, floggings, child sexual abuse in the name of marriage and sexual apartheid are only the most brutal and visible aspects of women’s rightlessness and third class status in the Middle East.

“Apologists for Islam state that the situation of women in Iran and in Islam-stricken countries is human folly; they say that Islamic rules and laws practiced in the Middle East are not following the true precepts of Islam. They state that we must separate Islam from the practice of Islamic governments and movements. In fact, however, the brutality and violence meted out against women and girls in nothing other than Islam itself.”

Continue reading

‘Atomic Iran’ TV ad rejected

Atomic IranA TV commercial warning Americans that Iran intends to launch a nuclear terror attack in the U.S. has been rejected by several stations due to fears it might inflame Muslims.

Titled “An Atomic 9-11: When Evil is Appeased,” the spot, sponsored by the Iran Freedom Foundation, is based on a scenario described in the new WND Books release “Atomic Iran: How the Terrorist Regime Bought the Bomb and American Politicians,” by Jerome R. Corsi, co-author of the best-selling “Unfit for Command.”

The ad, which can be viewed on the IFF website, began a month-long run last Tuesday in 17 markets nationwide. It was rejected, however, by independent stations in Chicago, Dallas and Roanoke, Va., according to the company that produced and distributed it, Fargo, N.D.-based TVAI, or Timeless Video Alternatives International.

Continue reading

Pope reaches out to Muslims after Mass snub

One day after ignoring Islam and hailing the “great spiritual heritage” shared by Jews and Christians in his inaugural Mass, Pope Benedict XVI on Monday, April 25, welcomed progress in Christian-Muslim dialogue.

“I am particularly grateful for the presence in our midst of members of the Muslim community,” the pontiff said in a private audience with the leaders of other religions and Christian Churches, reported Agence France-Presse (AFP).

“I express my appreciation for the growth of dialogue between Muslims and Christians, both at the local and international level,” said the new leader of the Roman Catholic Church.

“I assure you that the Church wants to continue building bridges of friendship with the followers of all religions, in order to seek the true good of every person and of society as a whole,” added the 78-year-old pope.

In a homily marking his inauguration, Pope Benedict XVI paid homage to “my brothers and sisters” of the Jewish people, but failed to make any reference to Islam or Muslims.

Islam Online, 25 April 2005

Robert Spencer, who had anticipated a harder line on Islam from the new pontiff, is worried that this may be “a sign that this Pope will continue along a familiar path of dhimmitude”. He finds some reassurance in the thought that the Pope’s call on “those who profess to belong to religious traditions” to follow the path of peace “might have been a pointed declaration to his audience that they need to clean their own house”.

Dhimmi Watch, 25 April 2005

‘Washington finally gets it on radical Islam’ – Pipes is pleased

“Does the Bush administration really believe, as its leadership has kept repeating since right after 9/11, that Islam is a ‘religion of peace’ not connected to the problem of terrorism?” Daniel Pipes asks.

Front Page Magazine, 25 April 2005

Pipes takes comfort in the news that “America’s highest officials widely agree that the country’s ‘greatest ideological foe is a highly politicized form of radical Islam and that Washington and its allies cannot afford to stand by’ as it gains in strength. To fight this ideology, the U.S. government now promotes a non-radical interpretation of Islam.”

But Pipes is still not entirely convinced: “Working to change how Muslims understand their religion, of course, raises some difficult implications. It is one thing to want to help moderate Muslims and quite another to locate them.”

All the same, this marks a bit of a retreat from Pipes’ recent denunciations of the Bush administration for going soft on Islam. Is he perhaps angling for a reappointment to the USIP board?

Islamophobes fall out

When it comes to rabid anti-Muslim propaganda, you might imagine it couldn’t get much worse than Jihad Watch. But you’d be wrong. There’s a website where Robert Spencer and his chums are regarded as whingeing liberals who have succumbed to Islamophilia.

The site is at FaithFreedom.org and recently one of its main contributors, Ali Sina, submitted an article to Jihad Watch which argued: “In the 1300s, the most deadly plague, dubbed as Black Death swept through Europe killing more than 25 million people – one-forth [sic] of the continent’s population…. Today we are facing a not very different situation. Islam is like bubonic plague.” (See here)

Continue reading

‘Europe’s mujahideen: mass immigration meets global terrorism’

“… in Western Europe, the two trends of mass immigration and global terrorism intersect visibly and dangerously. For more than a decade the region has formed a haven for Middle Eastern ‘dissidents’, often a.k.a. mujahideen, and for graduate students like Mohammed Atta. But these visitors or first generation immigrants are by no means the only source of concern. The murder of filmmaker Theo Van Gogh by a Dutch Muslim of Moroccan descent served notice for a new generation of mujahideen born and bred in Europe and the object of focused al Qaeda post-9-11 and post-Iraq recruitment.”

Robert S. Leiken, Center for Immigration Studies, April 2005

Robert Spencer applauds this “very informative piece”: Dhimmi Watch, 22 April 2005