Thursday, April 12, 2007

The Trouble With Islam, Part I of a Series

Charles Lindbergh and Senator Kennedy’s father, Joe Kennedy, changed their minds about Adolph Hitler and Nazi Germany when their true nature became obvious. I guess I have to say that, reluctantly, I am changing my mind about the dangers posed to the future of America by Muslims who seem determined to impose their Sharia and their beliefs on the rest of us.

We cannot any longer ignore what has happened and is happening in Great Britain and in continental Europe as the tide of “peaceful” Islam rolls over their culture and their citizens. And it is happening here. The terrorist sponsorship by C.A.I.R., the denial of Islamic terrorism by other American Muslim groups, the large number of minor terrorist killings by Muslims here since 9/11, the attempt to impose the Sharia in Canada, the refusal of Muslim taxi drivers to carry passengers who offend them, the atrocious act by the so-called “flying Imams” and their subsequent lawsuit – all this and more have changed my mind and led me to come to believe that we need a policy concerning Islam in America that encourages assimilation and discourages the imposition of the Muslim culture on us. Islam is a political movement as well as a religion and should be treated as such.

I suppose this will surprise my readers who know that I have consistently tried to keep separate the Islamic terrorists and their barbaric acts from the neighbors I have here in America who just happen to be Muslim. Only several days ago I wrote a column in which I praised President Bush for his attempts to protect Muslim citizens and his insistence that we are not in a religious war, but if American Muslims want to continue to keep silent about the terrorism, if they want to keep supporting American Imams who preach hatred, if they want to keep maintaining practices abhorrent to American customs, and want to keep trying to impose their beliefs on their neighbors, I have to say,”enough”. I understand that most American Muslims pose no danger, and that they are intimidated by those who do, but I also understand that what is happening in Europe cannot be allowed to happen here.

We need also to give American Muslims who want nothing more than to be left alone to pursue the American dream some tools to fend off the radical Muslims and we need to give them better incentives to expose the jihadists.

I will say that it has been the speeches and public appearances of former Muslim women like Homa Arjomand and Ayaan Hirsi Ali which also helped push me over this edge. The following article by another courageous Muslim was another straw among the thousands that have been piling up:

The Trouble With Islam
Sadly, mainstream Muslim teaching accepts and promotes violence.

BY TAWFIK HAMID, Opinion Journal
Tuesday, April 3, 2007 12:01 a.m.

Not many years ago the brilliant Orientalist, Bernard Lewis, published a short history of the Islamic world's decline, entitled "What Went Wrong?" Astonishingly, there was, among many Western "progressives," a vocal dislike for the title. It is a false premise, these critics protested. They ignored Mr. Lewis's implicit statement that things have been, or could be, right.

But indeed, there is much that is clearly wrong with the Islamic world. Women are stoned to death and undergo clitorectomies. Gays hang from the gallows under the approving eyes of the proponents of Shariah, the legal code of Islam. Sunni and Shia massacre each other daily in Iraq. Palestinian mothers teach 3-year-old boys and girls the ideal of martyrdom. One would expect the orthodox Islamic establishment to evade or dismiss these complaints, but less happily, the non-Muslim priests of enlightenment in the West have come, actively and passively, to the Islamists' defense.

These "progressives" frequently cite the need to examine "root causes." In this they are correct: Terrorism is only the manifestation of a disease and not the disease itself. But the root-causes are quite different from what they think. As a former member of Jemaah Islamiya, a group led by al Qaeda's second in command, Ayman al-Zawahiri, I know firsthand that the inhumane teaching in Islamist ideology can transform a young, benevolent mind into that of a terrorist. Without confronting the ideological roots of radical Islam it will be impossible to combat it. While there are many ideological "rootlets" of Islamism, the main tap root has a name--Salafism, or Salafi Islam, a violent, ultra-conservative version of the religion.

It is vital to grasp that traditional and even mainstream Islamic teaching accepts and promotes violence. Shariah, for example, allows apostates to be killed, permits beating women to discipline them, seeks to subjugate non-Muslims to Islam as dhimmis and justifies declaring war to do so. It exhorts good Muslims to exterminate the Jews before the "end of days." The near deafening silence of the Muslim majority against these barbaric practices is evidence enough that there is something fundamentally wrong.

The grave predicament we face in the Islamic world is the virtual lack of approved, theologically rigorous interpretations of Islam that clearly challenge the abusive aspects of Shariah. Unlike Salafism, more liberal branches of Islam, such as Sufism, typically do not provide the essential theological base to nullify the cruel proclamations of their Salafist counterparts. And so, for more than 20 years I have been developing and working to establish a theologically-rigorous Islam that teaches peace.

Yet it is ironic and discouraging that many non-Muslim, Western intellectuals--who unceasingly claim to support human rights--have become obstacles to reforming Islam. Political correctness among Westerners obstructs unambiguous criticism of Shariah's inhumanity. They find socioeconomic or political excuses for Islamist terrorism such as poverty, colonialism, discrimination or the existence of Israel. What incentive is there for Muslims to demand reform when Western "progressives" pave the way for Islamist barbarity? Indeed, if the problem is not one of religious beliefs, it leaves one to wonder why Christians who live among Muslims under identical circumstances refrain from contributing to wide-scale, systematic campaigns of terror.

Politicians and scholars in the West have taken up the chant that Islamic extremism is caused by the Arab-Israeli conflict. This analysis cannot convince any rational person that the Islamist murder of over 150,000 innocent people in Algeria--which happened in the last few decades--or their slaying of hundreds of Buddhists in Thailand, or the brutal violence between Sunni and Shia in Iraq could have anything to do with the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Western feminists duly fight in their home countries for equal pay and opportunity, but seemingly ignore, under a façade of cultural relativism, that large numbers of women in the Islamic world live under threat of beating, execution and genital mutilation, or cannot vote, drive cars and dress as they please.

The tendency of many Westerners to restrict themselves to self-criticism further obstructs reformation in Islam. Americans demonstrate against the war in Iraq, yet decline to demonstrate against the terrorists who kidnap innocent people and behead them. Similarly, after the Madrid train bombings, millions of Spanish citizens demonstrated against their separatist organization, ETA. But once the demonstrators realized that Muslims were behind the terror attacks they suspended the demonstrations. This example sent a message to radical Islamists to continue their violent methods.

Western appeasement of their Muslim communities has exacerbated the problem. During the four-month period after the publication of the Muhammad cartoons in a Danish magazine, there were comparatively few violent demonstrations by Muslims. Within a few days of the Danish magazine's formal apology, riots erupted throughout the world. The apology had been perceived by Islamists as weakness and concession.

Worst of all, perhaps, is the anti-Americanism among many Westerners. It is a resentment so strong, so deep-seated, so rooted in personal identity, that it has led many, consciously or unconsciously, to morally support America's enemies.
Progressives need to realize that radical Islam is based on an antiliberal system. They need to awaken to the inhumane policies and practices of Islamists around the world. They need to realize that Islamism spells the death of liberal values. And they must not take for granted the respect for human rights and dignity that we experience in America, and indeed, the West, today.

Well-meaning interfaith dialogues with Muslims have largely been fruitless. Participants must demand--but so far haven't--that Muslim organizations and scholars specifically and unambiguously denounce violent Salafi components in their mosques and in the media. Muslims who do not vocally oppose brutal Shariah decrees should not be considered "moderates."

All of this makes the efforts of Muslim reformers more difficult. When Westerners make politically-correct excuses for Islamism, it actually endangers the lives of reformers and in many cases has the effect of suppressing their voices.

Tolerance does not mean toleration of atrocities under the umbrella of relativism. It is time for all of us in the free world to face the reality of Salafi Islam or the reality of radical Islam will continue to face us.

Dr. Hamid, a onetime member of Jemaah Islamiya, an Islamist terrorist group, is a medical doctor and Muslim reformer living in the West.

Labels: , ,

AddThis Social Bookmark Button


At 9:27 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I agree with your conclusion. I think when non terrorist Muslims experience or come to understand the consequences that their terrorist relgious Muslim brothers cause - that this may make them want to help address and correct the "problem".

I'm hopeful that you will one day see the light on the seriousness AND manmade contribution of the global warming...which will increasingly become as big a problem as the spread of Islam.

At 3:05 PM, Blogger RussWilcox said...

Re: Muslims - I think I have been slow to reach these conclusions because I have a need to be fair. I also think most Americans have the same kind of filter that we have to work through.
RE: manmade glogal warming - we have to agree to disagree. There was a commercial today placed by an advocacy group on global warming. It said you could reduce global warming by unplugging your cell phone charger when not in use. This fits right in with the rest of their 'science'.

At 9:50 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ok, we'll agree to disagree. The commercial is correct though if it's a home charger, not a car charger. We all routinely leave appliances on and most today have the instant on function meaning they are drawing electricity all the time (or worse, always on). Creating electricity uses power, creating power contributes to the problem unless it is solar or wind (probably 1-2%) or nuclear (also a small percentage). A typical home PC is an example of this. Unless you use it routinely (like daily), you should power off both the PC and the monitor)...costs money...wastes electricity...contributes to global warming. - Every little bit helps. Even a PC that is totally turned off STILL uses electricity.

For comparison, the US uses triple what China uses, 5X what Russia uses. Like most things, we are the largest consumer and contributor by far.


Post a Comment

<< Home