Bill Maher: If ISIS Is So Anathema To "Moderate Muslims" How Come Zero Have Gone To Fight Them?

Read about it here | Saturday, April 25, 2015

PETER MORICI: Obama and Moderate Muslims Both Fail to Fight Islamic Extremism

Fighting racism, prejudice and the violence those can beget is everyone's job. Muslims would do well to respond to President Obama's invitation to combat extremist ideas in their communities, but too often Washington's broader policies toward minorities encourage just the opposite. Ideologies of love and hate have a lot in common. Those appeal to youth seeking…

WND Exclusive: ’Moderate’ Muslims Back Death for ‘Gays’

'Peace' conference speaker finds audience affirms Islamic-law punishments

Read the WND article here | Wednesday, May 28, 2014

Moderate Muslims Struggle to Make Their Voices Heard
What is the true face of Islam?

U.S.-approved ‘Muslims’
THE TRENTONIAN: America is desperate to find un-Muslim-like allies among the world’s Muslims. That is, Muslims who believe as Americans do that no particular religion should have the upper hand in politics and government.

Alas, the Pew Research Foundation polls keep revealing that this search is a chimerical quest. The Pew polling regularly reports overwhelming support in the “Muslim world” for the rule of Sharia, Islamic law, and for Islam-dominated policy and government.

Which inevitably means that Muslim nations are going to be suspicious of, if not hostile to, U.S. notions of what constitutes Islamic extremism.

This perhaps is why President Obama avoids using the modifier “Islamic” when referring to extremism, even extremism obviously based on interpretations of Islam. He perhaps believes such references would be counterproductive. (Perhaps he’s right, perhaps not.)

Middle East scholar Daniel Pipes has a mantra that goes: “Extreme Islam is the problem, moderate Islam is the solution.” Problem is, our notion of “moderate” may bear little resemblance to the notions prevalent in Muslim countries.

What if Muslims endorsed a particular religious perspective for Christians in American — Gnosticism, say? Not only would there likely not be a rush to embrace is, there would likely be a stampede to condemn it — and demands that Muslims mind their own damn business. » | Tuesday, May 21, 2013

Who Is A Moderate Muslim?
There are Islamists and there are moderate Muslims. In our public parlance, the latter are the "good" and "reasonable" Muslims. But in a world of 1.5 billion Muslims, the division between Islamists and moderate Muslims leaves many nuances invisible. If the vast majority of Muslims fall into the moderate camp, then there must be many shades of moderation to be discerned. Who is a modern, moderate Muslim?

The Moderate Muslim Threat
YNET NEWS: Op-ed: NY mosque affair another sign moderate Muslims more dangerous than radicals

Muslims should build mosques “everywhere,” Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Zahar declared Tuesday as he addressed the plans to build a mosque near ground zero in New York. Most of his Muslim brethren, moderates and radicals alike, likely endorsed this sentiment. After all, when one of the pillars of Islam is its very dissemination, one should not wonder that even the “moderates” view ground zero as a suitable site for a mosque.

The fact that almost all global terror in recent years is carried out in the name of Islamic ideas being recited day and night at the finest mosques (both in the East and West,) and that almost 3,000 people were killed in New York in the name of these notions nine years ago should have elicited at least a hint of understanding for the feelings of the victims’ families on the part of Islamic moderates.

New York Governor David Patterson recently announced that Muslims refused his offer to find an alternate site for the new Islamic center. He may have forgotten for a moment that more than anything, the center and its name (The Cordoba House) are a symbol. Seemingly, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, Sharif el-Gamal and their partners could have scored quite a few points in America’s public opinion (which in all polls shows firm objection to the center’s establishment) had they accepted Patterson’s proposal.

After all, these distinguished gentleman fully realize that the various shades of Islam, even without the center, do not enjoy an especially positive image in US public opinion, and that a gesture conceding only the site of the mosque, rather than the principle of building it, was virtually a win-win situation for them. Moreover, their willingness to change the location would have ended almost at once the ongoing media and public debate on the actions of 19 of their Islamic brethren nine years ago and the thousands of their victims.

If, as Rauf and Gamal argue, the center’s main purpose is to encourage tolerance and promote interfaith dialogue, while showing maximal sensitivity to the feelings of others, would it not be natural to show a little more than zero tolerance and consideration for other people’s feelings, instead of dismissing out of hand many families of September 11 victims who ask that the mosque be built somewhere else? The trap of Islamic rhetoric >>> Shaul Rosenfeld * | Wednesday, August 18, 2010

* Dr. Shaul Rosenfeld is a philosophy lecturer

Detroit Terror Attack: A Murderous Ideology Tolerated for Too Long
A whiff of common sense here. People are beginning to wake up from their slumbers. Surely, the tide must be beginning to turn. It must turn if the West is to be won.

This viewpoint from The Telegraph is refreshing indeed; yet it doesn’t go far enough. Radical Islamism is a symptom of a fanatic belief in Islam. In many ways, it is the true belief of a Muslim, one who, in their eyes, submits to the will of Allah, but who in anyone else’s eyes can only be thought of submitting to the ideology of a death cult: Islam.

If we are to win this war being waged against the West, otherwise known as the Jihad – an intermittent war which has been waged against the “infidel West” since Islam’s inception – then we have to come to the realization that Islam is not a religion per se, but a religio-political system which recognizes NO SEPARATION OF POLITICS AND RELIGION. The separation of politics and religion is the sine qua non of democracy. No democracy can exist without it. Islam is the true enemy of democracy and freedom. No true democracy will ever exist where Islam is the dominant ideology. This is so not only because Islam recognizes no separation of mosque and state, but also because Islam recognizes no diversity. None whatsoever! Islam recognizes one religion – Islam, and one way of life – the Islamic way of life. In an age of multiculturalism and diversity, it is incredible that we should tolerate such an intolerant ideology in our midst, for truly, if Islam gets the upper hand here in the West – and it is looking increasingly likely in the long- or medium-term, then there will be no diversity. There will be only Islam. Apostates will be killed, as will homosexuals. It will then be a case of convert, die, or pay the jizyah, the special tax levied on the infidel in return for some measure of protection. Remember this: Multiculturalism and diversity are anathema to Islam!

Westerners have faffed around, played around with our language for far, far too long. We have come up with all kinds of weird and wonderful expressions, euphemisms all, and all thought-up and devised so as not to appear Islamophobic, so as not to point the finger at a religion and thereby appear religiously bigotted, and to keep the peace at any price. The euphemisms are well-known to all by now: Islamism, radical Islamism (as though there could ever be a non-radical Islamism!), radical Jihadism (again, as though there could ever be a benign, non-radical Jihadism), and so on and so forth. There are but three words that we need in our vocabulary: Islam, Muslim, and the Jihad. An Islamist is a devout follower of the faith of Islam. A believer that dots the ‘i’s’ and crosses the ‘t’s’. Contrary to popular Western myth, he is not one who has perverted his faith; rather, he is the real thing. Just as much the real thing as Coke is to cola.

The Muslims considered by the West as being peaceful and law-abiding are actually people who do not follow central aspects of their faith such as the Jihad, the killing of apostates, honour killings, and other repugnant tenets of that faith.

That The Telegraph has now had the courage to liken ‘Islamism’ to Nazism is to be lauded. It should be noted, however, that this fact has been pointed out on this website since the website was started. Naturally, it was also pointed out in my book. Having taken this bold step forward, The Telegraph now needs to take the next step and call a spade a spade.– © Mark

THE TELEGRAPH: Telegraph View: Jihadist Islamism is comparable to Nazism in many respects. The British public realises this; so do the intelligence services.

Friday's attempt to blow up a transatlantic airliner by a British-educated Islamist was foiled by the bravery of its passengers and crew. We cannot assume that we will be lucky next time. And the indications are that there will be a next time. According to police sources, 25 British-born Muslims are currently in Yemen being trained in the art of bombing planes. But most of these terrorists did not acquire their crazed beliefs in the Islamic world: they were indoctrinated in Britain. Indeed, thousands of young British Muslims support the use of violence to further the Islamist cause – and this despite millions of pounds poured by the Government into projects designed to prevent Islamic extremism.

Is it time for a fundamental rethink of Britain's attitude towards domestic Islamism? Consider this analogy. Suppose that, in several London universities, Right‑wing student societies were allowed to invite neo-Nazi speakers to address teenagers. Meanwhile, churches in poor white neighbourhoods handed over their pulpits to Jew-hating admirers of Adolf Hitler, called for the execution of homosexuals, preached the intellectual inferiority of women, and blessed the murder of civilians. What would the Government do? It would bring the full might of the criminal law against activists indoctrinating young Britons with an inhuman Nazi ideology – and the authorities that let them. Any public servants complicit in this evil would be hounded from their jobs. >>> | Tuesday, December 29, 2009

THE TELEGRAPH: Obama tries to find new words to fight terrorism: Barack Obama has launched a new offensive against jihadi terrorism – which is to say, a new rhetorical offensive. Having discovered that the earlier Obama doctrine of “reaching out” to the Islamic fundamentalist enemies of western democracy has made no difference whatever to their determination to blow innocent people out of the sky (or, in the case of Iran, to build a nuclear bomb), he is opening another verbal front. >>> Janet Daley | Tuesday, December 29, 2009

Less Violent Islamists Are Still Islamists
ISRAELeNEWS: A fierce debate is brewing among jihadists, it seems. To hear pundits and the CIA boss describe it, the rupture is growing over interpretations by radical theologians about whom to kill and how to do it in the name of God.

It is progress of sorts flushing out mea culpas from repentant Islamists and widening divisions within Terror Inc., but far from advancement toward a triumph in a war of terror.

A more serious shortcoming is an accompanying refrain promoting “moderate Islam” to fill the void. That is tantamount to saying: “Okay, we take bin Laden heavy off the table and give you Sharia light.”

A month ago I was on a panel discussion on “Confronting Radicalism in the Arab World” that included Tawfik Hamid, whose pedigree includes serving in al-Gamaa al-Islamiyya, the bloodiest of Egypt’s terror groups that assassinated Egypt’s Anwar Sadat in 1981 and carried out assaults on hundreds of intellectuals, writers (including Nobel Laureate Naguib Mahfouz), Christians, and government officials in the eighties.

Hamid has developed a good gig as speaker and op-ed writer (mostly at the Wall Street Journal). He passionately expounds on “conditional” interpretations of Koranic verses urging killing of apostates, non-Muslims, infidels, and renegades, explaining that his former colleagues misinterpret them. His subtext is trickier, pleading for a second chance for “moderate Islam” to accomplish what radical Islam clearly is failing at.

Why are we debating on such uneven playing fields? If Muslims want to reeducate radicals in their midst, the argument should not be about laying out more space for moderate Islamists.

Both never differed on their rejection of secular civil society. Indeed, scholarship accumulated since 9/11 demonstrates that Islamist groups — the Taliban, Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, and so on, as well as the declared leadership of Muslim communities in Europe and America — are all spawned from the umbrella Muslim Brotherhood school of thought. Like it, moderate Islam’s single-minded pursuit has never been about blending.

The most prominent such group in America, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, CAIR, was first to leap to the defense of 700 Somali Muslim cab drivers who at the Minneapolis airport in 2007 launched a boycott of passengers with seeing-eye dogs (animals are dirty) or those carrying liquor (that’s sinful). CAIR again latched onto the seven imams taken off a commercial flight in 2006 after staging a flamboyant public prayer at an airport boarding area and requesting special seating arrangements on the flight in an obvious provocation of fear. Less Violent Islamists Are Still Islamists >>> By Youssef Ibrahim | June 15, 2008

The Dawning of a New Dark Age (Paperback - UK)
The Dawning of a New Dark Age (Hardback - UK)

Amil Imani: Who's the Bigger Threat: The Moderate Muslims or the Jihadists?

ISLAM WATCH: Humanity has suffered horrific wars in the past. Yet, the present multi-form and multi-front war waged by Islamists has the potential of inflicting more suffering and destroying more lives than ever before. Ruthless Islamic forces are advancing rapidly in their conquests while those of freedom are acquiescing and retreating. Before long, Islamism is poised to achieve its Allah-mandated goal of cleansing the earth of all non-Muslims. Any and all means and weapons are to be enlisted in the service of this final holy war that aims to establish the Islamic Ummeh.

Is "Moderate Islam" an illusion? Moderate Islam is a wedge that will jam open the door to Jihad. The great majority of Muslims are not adherents of the radical line. Yet, because the Islamists wage their war under the name of Islam, they receive immense direct and indirect support from the rank-and-file ordinary Muslims. It is this support of moderate Muslims that keeps the Jihadists alive. And it is the Jihadists who intend to show no mercy to any and all who do not share their theology, be they Muslims or not.

For the record, all Muslims, moderates, radicals, Shiite, Sunnis and other sects and sub-sects of Islam are in unanimous agreement that the Quran is the word of "Allah." All Muslims are also in agreement that "Allah" spoke through the Angel Gabriel to Muhammad. Allah declares, "The book is not to be doubted."

To be a loyal and faithful Muslim, one must adhere to and perform many rituals, as specified in the Quran by Allah and the Hadiths/Sunna, every waking moment of his entire life. Disobeying these rituals does not make one a moderate Muslim, but rather it would make him a non-Muslim, facing an uncertain future. Who's the Bigger Threat: The Moderate Muslims or the Jihadists? >>> By Amil Imani (28 Nov, 2007)

Mark Alexander