Why More Muslims Won’t Condemn ISIS

15_16_Muslims_ISIS

• Are Western politicians deluding themselves by calling Islam a “religion of peace”?

By Patrick J. Buchanan —

“We are not at war with Islam,” said John Kasich after the Brussels massacre on March 22. “We’re at war with radical Islam.” Kasich’s point raises a question: Does the Islamic faith in any way sanction or condone what those suicide bombers did?

For surely the brothers and their accomplice who ignited the bombs in the airport and set off the explosion on the subway did not do so believing they were blasting themselves to hell for all eternity.

One has to assume they hoped to be martyrs to their faith if they slaughtered infidels to terrify and expel such as these from the Islamic world and advance the coming of the caliphate of which the Prophet preached.

And where might they have gotten such ideas? Kasich’s word, radical, comes from the Latin “radix,” or root. And if one returns to the roots of Islam, to the Koran, does one find condemnation of what the brothers did—or justification?

Andrew McCarthy was the prosecutor of the “Blind Sheikh” whose terrorist cell tried to bring down a World Trade Center tower in 1993, and plotted bombings in the Holland and Lincoln tunnels. The U.S. government depicted the sheikh as a wanton killer who distorted the teachings of his faith. Yet McCarthy discovered that Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman was no imposter-imam, but “a globally renowned scholar—a doctor of Islamic jurisprudence who graduated from al-Azhar University in Cairo, the seat of Sunni Islamic learning for over a millennium.”

Seeking to expose the sheikh as a fraud who had led his gullible followers into terrorism, against the tenets of their faith, McCarthy discovered that “Abdel Rahman was not lying about Islam.”

“When he said the scriptures command that Muslims strike terror into the hearts of Islam’s enemies, the scriptures backed him up. When he said Allah enjoined all Muslims to wage jihad until Islamic law was established throughout the world, the scriptures backed him up.”

“[T]he Blind Sheikh’s summons to Islam was rooted in a coherent interpretation of Islamic doctrine. He was not perverting Islam,” writes McCarthy in the Hillsdale College letter Imprimis. McCarthy goes on: “Islam is not a religion of peace. … Verses such as ‘Fight those who believe not in Allah,’ and ‘Fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem of war’ are not peaceful injunctions. . . .”

Emigrate While You Still Can! Learn More . . .

In its formative first century, Islam conquered the Middle and Near East, North Africa, and Spain with sword and slaughter, not persuasion and conversion.

Undeniably, there are millions of Muslims in America who love this country and have served it in every walk of life, from cops, firemen, and soldiers, to doctors, scholars, and clergy.

Yet when “moderate, peaceful Muslims” were called to testify as defense witnesses, says McCarthy, they could not contradict the Blind Sheikh’s claim that he had correctly interpreted the Koran. The questions that arise are crucial.

When we call Islam a “religion of peace,” are we projecting our own hopes? Are we deceiving ourselves? Are the Muslims we respect, admire, and like, as friends and patriots, assimilated and “Americanized” Muslims who have drifted away from, set aside, or rejected many core beliefs of the Koran and root teachings of their own faith? Are they simply secularized Muslims?



 

When the Afghan regime we installed sought to cut off the head of a Christian convert, was that un-Islamic? Or does Islam teach that this is the way to deal with apostates? Or is that what the Koran actually teaches?

Have the Islamists of al-Shabab in Somalia, Boko Haram in Nigeria, Hezbollah in Lebanon, al Qaeda and ISIS in Syria and Iraq—who daily die fighting in the name of Islam—misread their sacred texts? Are they all heretics who fail to understand the peaceful and loving character of their Islamic faith?

Or is the West deluding itself? Is it possible we are the ones misreading the sacred books of Islam and what the triumph of Islam would mean for our civilization—because we lack the courage to face the truth and do what is necessary to avoid our fate?

Islam is rising again. Of its 1.6 billion adherents worldwide, many are returning to the roots of their faith, seeking to live their lives as commanded by the Prophet, the Koran and Sharia.

Western survival would seem to dictate a halt to all immigration from lands where this deadly virus we call “radical Islam”—with which Kasich concedes we are at war—is rampant, just as we would halt immigration from lands where the bubonic plague was rampant.

That would surely contradict the cherished beliefs of Western liberals.

But, then, as James Burnham reminded us, “Liberalism is the ideology of Western suicide.” 

Donate to us

Patrick J. Buchanan is a writer, political commentator, presidential candidate and author.

image_print

2 Responses to Why More Muslims Won’t Condemn ISIS

  1. Tiredoflies says:
    Right on Jamal.

    Here’s a story which shows that Muslims oppose ISIS. Nobody in the so called “alternative media” bothered to report this. As a Christian, I’m angry at so called “Christians” who are the “bearing false witness” against innocent Muslims.

    You Didn’t Hear About This Muslim March Against Terror Because Media Didn’t Cover It

  2. jamal says:
    Why more Muslims won’t condemn ISIS? Seriously? It has been Muslim nations condemning them from the beginning. It was people like Saddam, Qaddafi, Assad, Hezbollah, Iran and so on who warned and condemned them and were, ironically fought against, removed or killed because of it. For the sake of Israel, who along with its “Western” puppets, America and Britain in particular, actually back these terrorists. And yes even the al Qaeda affiliated blind sheik you speak of was backed by these entities. The attacks on the WTC were Zionist attacks not Muslim. Yes, all religions have been perverted by manmade scripts such as the Hadith, the Talmud and false books and teachings in the Bible. No, the Quran does not endorse the killing of innocents. Funny and typical using the verses you did without explaining them. In particular the one of killing pagans wherever you find them without explaining this was about the pagans who attacked and were at war with the Muslims. And that this referred to them and not innocent people or Christians and Jews, who are called people of the book in the Quran. And also the verses after this one which says if they turn in truce or peace to stop the attacks and honor it. Yes, very funny no mention of that. As far as quotes you claim promote terrorism and murder, let me not get started on how many biblical quotes are construed to mean the very same things (also in the name of God and cleansing the land). All of these terrorist groups have been proven to be funded, trained and directed by the West and their allies like Saudi Arabia. Notice the nations listed before and what happened to them at the hands of the West. Take note of the Oded Yinon plan. Why, if Saudi Arabia and other nations are known to be guilty of supporting these groups are we attacking the very nations that aren’t? The countless dead innocent Muslims at the hands of the West for Israel, and MUSLIMS are the terrorists? I think when the West says religion of peace what they really want Islam to be is a religion that submits to them, do what they say and want and never fight for itself. Patrick Buchanan, you know nothing of Islam, so please learn something before you spew your trash.

Leave a Comment

Required fields are marked with an *. Your email address will not be published. All comments containing hyperlinks will be held in moderation until they are formatted properly, but will be posted. All comments containing obscenities will be amended and posted, unless they are too obscene and nonsensical, in which case they will be deleted.