SAN DIEGO, August 27, 2014 — “Let’s be clear about ISIL (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant),” President Obama said firmly last week after confirmation that the terrorist organization had beheaded American journalist Jim Foley.
“They have rampaged across cities and villages,” he continued, “killing innocent, unarmed civilians in cowardly acts of violence. They abduct women and children, and subject them to torture and rape and slavery. They have murdered Muslims — both Sunni and Shia — by the thousands. They target Christians and religious minorities, driving them from their homes, murdering them when they can for no other reason than they practice a different religion. They declared their ambition to commit genocide against an ancient people.”
Up to this point in the speech, the president was uncharacteristically accurate in his assessment of a foreign threat. But he couldn’t resist adding that tired, obligatory disclaimer that Muslim terrorists are not truly practicing Islam.
Truth and falsehood were woven together in those last remarks. It is ironically true that the victims of Muslims are often other Muslims accused of not being obedient enough to the dictates of Jihad. It is also true that no just God would stand for such pure evil. But this only begs a much larger question: Does the doctrine of the Koran lead us to a just God or some other kind of God?
As for the targeting of innocents, Mr. President, that is exactly what the true Muslim faith does. No, the Koran would not describe its targets as “innocents,” instead calling them “infidels” and “blasphemers,” but they remain innocent casualties by any decent understanding of the word.
It is the Koran itself that is being held up to scrutiny here, not the entire Muslim world population.
There are many peaceful Muslims in the world who want no part of this barbarity. However, while every Muslim must be judged on an individual basis, evaluating Islam itself is another matter. The Jihad commands of Surah 9 and many other passages of the Koran really do call upon Muslims to conquer the world, offering “infidels” the choice of converting, submitting to Muslim rule, or dying.
That is a powerful and controversial claim; let’s address the anticipated objections one at a time:
“But only the terrorists take those words seriously.”
Not so. It is true that the terrorists (sadly) are interpreting the Koran accurately, but many Muslims who do not identify themselves as terrorists still abide by their own book, which makes sense. After all, to them, the Koran is sacred scripture.
“Are you saying there is no such thing as a moderate Muslim?”
Many Muslims call themselves moderate, but the Koran itself leaves no room for moderation. Therefore, those who consider themselves moderate Muslims are actually nominal Muslims.
What do we mean by nominal? Just as there are people who live in America or Europe who know absolutely nothing about the Bible other than a few choice ideas taken out of context, people who nevertheless call themselves Christians because they were raised with some kind of church background, there are likewise many people born into Muslim countries or raised by Muslim families.
If you asked them if they believed in the Koran, they would say, “Yes.” If you asked if they believed in the Jihad, they would deny it and they would be telling the truth. There are millions of such people and yes, they are peaceful Muslims.
There are also Muslims who see the Jihad verses and choose to interpret them differently.
However, any Muslim who takes the Koran seriously and literally, who truly understands the entire message, not only accepts the Jihad commands, but is also taught that it is okay to lie during a time of war.
Why not let Mohammad speak for himself?
“Lying is wrong, except in three things; the lie of a man to his wife to make her content with him, a lie to an enemy, for war is deception, or a lie to settle trouble between people.” (Hadith, Mussnad Ahmad 6:459).
Even so-called “moderate” Muslims are allowed to lie during a time of war and deny that they believe in the Jihad. On that note, when is militant Islam not at war?
This explains why the allegation of a “moderate” organization such as CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) having ties to terrorist groups is not such a stretch of the imagination.
Although CAIR officials deny the connection, FBI agent Lara Burns, during testimony at a 2010 trial regarding CAIR’s connection with Palestine Committee and its relationship with Hamas, read from the transcript of a 1993 Hamas supporter group in Philadelphia where the idea of starting a new organization with a less threatening name was being discussed. Her reading was a quotation from Holy Land Foundation President Shukri Abu Baker:
“And let’s not hoist a large Islamic flag, and let’s not be barbaric-talking. We will remain a front so that if the thing happens, we will benefit from the new happenings instead of having all of our organizations classified and exposed.”
Daniel Pipes pointed to similar connections in a 2005 article for Front Page Magazine, co-authored with Sharon Chadha:
“The Institute of Islamic Thought, an institution linked to the Muslim Brotherhood, gave CAIR’s Washington office $14000.00 in 2003.”
Whether we’re talking about the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, or the most current horrific news maker, ISIL, it must be noted that these different organizations are really the same cereal in different boxes. The accurate title describing all of them is Militant Islam.
All branches of militant Islam have declared war on the non-Muslim and they have specifically articulated this goal as war against United States, whether we accept it or not. Since they get their cues from the Koran and not U.S. Middle Eastern policy, we’d best put away the self imposed guilt, mindless diplomacy, and the ultimately useless surgical military responses. The only way to end this war is to truly win this war.
Yes, there are many nominal Muslims, but a dedicated Muslim who accepts the Koran literally and truly understands the Koran, is not allowed to be moderate. It is time for U.S. foreign policy to also end its moderation.
This is Bob Siegel, making the obvious, obvious.
The Wall Street Journal,The Investigative Project on Terrorism, and Front Page Magazine contributed to this story.Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2014 Communities Digital News
This article is the copyrighted property of the writer and Communities Digital News, LLC. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media. REPRINTING CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.
Correspondingly, Communities Digital News, LLC uses its best efforts to operate in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine under US Copyright Law and always tries to provide proper attribution. If you have reason to believe that any written material or image has been innocently infringed, please bring it to the immediate attention of CDN via the e-mail address or phone number listed on the Contact page so that it can be resolved expeditiously.