You are here

PJ Media

  • Country: 
    United States Minor Outlying Islands (the)
    United States of America (the)
    News Date: 
    18/11/2019
    Summary: 

    He  a Unity Interfaith Worship Service at a Montgomery church, where the Rev. Dr.

  • Summary: 

    This sums up the situation:

    The Islamic roots of Islamic jihad terrorism are one reality that virtually no one at any point on the political spectrum wishes to address. Mead and other analysts like him, with unconscious paternalism, act as if Muslims were mere passive reactors to what non-Muslims do

    Establishment academic Walter Russell Mead, writing about the killing of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in the  Monday, declared: “Movements like ISIS don’t spring from nowhere. It took centuries of decline, serial humiliations at the hands of arrogant European imperial powers, and decades of failed postcolonial governance to produce the toxic mixture of bigotry.”

    Really? ISIS (and presumably other Islamic jihad terror groups) arise from “serial humiliations at the hands of arrogant European imperial powers, and decades of failed postcolonial governance”? No chance that “movements like ISIS’ might have sprung from Islamic texts such as these?

    “And kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from where they drove you out; persecution is worse than slaughter. But fight them not by the Holy Mosque until they should fight you there; then, if they fight you, kill them — such is the recompense of unbelievers, but if they give over, surely Allah is all-forgiving, all-compassionate. Fight them until there is no persecution and the religion is Allah’s; then if they give over, there shall be no enmity save for evildoers.” (Qur’an 2:191-193)

    See also:

  • Summary: 

    It’s a “disturbing trend,” says Asma T. Uddin, a Muslim attorney, in the : “In recent years, state lawmakers, lawyers and influential social commentators have been making the case that Muslims are not protected by the First Amendment. Why? Because, they argue, Islam is not a religion.”

    What it is, say Uddin’s targets, is a political system: “John Bennett, a Republican state legislator in Oklahoma, , ‘Islam is not even a religion; it is a political system that uses a deity to advance its agenda of global conquest.’ In 2015, a former assistant United States attorney, Andrew C. McCarthy,  in National Review that Islam ‘should be understood as conveying a belief system that is not merely, or even primarily, religious.’ In 2016, Michael Flynn, who the next year was briefly President Trump’s national security adviser,  an  conference in Dallas that ‘Islam is a political ideology’ that ‘hides behind the notion of it being a religion.’ In a January 2018 news release, Neal Tapio of South Dakota, a Republican state senator who was planning to run for the United States House of Representatives,  to Muslims.”

    Merriam Webster defines “religion” as “a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices.” Islam certainly qualifies as a religion by that definition. Religions profess to connect human beings to the divine. Islam professes to do that. At the same time, however, it [Islam] is also a political system that is authoritarian, supremacist, discriminatory, expansionist, violent, and aggressive.

    Asma T. Uddin must be aware of that fact but ignores it entirely, instead giving the impression that Sharia is simply religious law, and opposition to Sharia is simply motivated by religious bigotry and “Islamophobia.”

    See also:

     

  • Summary: 

    In April 2008, during his keynote address to the first conference of the Association for the Study of the Middle East and Africa,  of the ominous limits on scholarly analysis of Islam imposed by political correctness and multiculturalism:

     

    The degree of thought control, of limitations on freedom of speech and expression is without parallel in the Western world since the eighteenth century and in some cases longer than that. ... It seems to me it’s a very dangerous situation, because it makes any kind of scholarly discussion of Islam, to say the least, dangerous. Islam and Islamic values now have a level of immunity from comment and criticism in the Western world that Christianity has lost and Judaism has never had.

  • Summary: 

    (Editor’s note: All historical quotes and facts in this article are sourced from the author’s new book, .)

    That she was seen as a piece of meat is evident in other ways: “The Pakistani men I came into contact with made me believe I was nothing more than a slut, a white whore. They treated me like a leper, apart from when they wanted sex.  I was less than human to them, I was rubbish.”

    What explains the ongoing victimization of European women by Muslim men—which  and has become epidemic in Germany Sweden, and elsewhere?

    While these sordid accounts are routinely dismissed as the activities of “criminals,” they are in fact reflective of nearly fourteen centuries of Muslim views on and treatment of European women.  Nothing in Kate’s account—not even the otherwise extreme aspect of taking her to Morocco to be a sex slave—has not happened countless times over the centuries.

  • Summary: 

    Despite their ongoing antagonisms—played out, prominently, on Fox News—a bizarre, shared apologetic has emerged which denies the irrefragable sanctioning of female genital mutilation/“circumcision” (FGM/C) by canonical Islamic tradition (“hadith”), and over 1100 years of authoritative, mainstream Islamic jurisprudence. The strange bedfellow antagonists engaged in these overlapping apologetics about FGM/C are the Clarion Foundation and its film “,” allied with the Ayaan Hirsi Ali Foundation (Ms. Ali is also listed as the film’s executive producer), “versus” the , the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). Fox News has served as overseer of this “conflict” cum consensus, while also reinforcing the fallacy that FGM/C is simply a tragic manifestation of misogynistic patriarchal trends that are generic, and have “no basis” in Islam and the Sharia, Islamic law.

  • Summary: 

    Despite their ongoing antagonisms—played out, prominently, on Fox News—a bizarre, shared apologetic has emerged which denies the irrefragable sanctioning of female genital mutilation/“circumcision” (FGM/C) by canonical Islamic tradition (“hadith”), and over 1100 years of authoritative, mainstream Islamic jurisprudence. The strange bedfellow antagonists engaged in these overlapping apologetics about FGM/C are the Clarion Foundation and its film “,” allied with the Ayaan Hirsi Ali Foundation (Ms. Ali is also listed as the film’s executive producer), “versus” the , the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). Fox News has served as overseer of this “conflict” cum consensus, while also reinforcing the fallacy that FGM/C is simply a tragic manifestation of misogynistic patriarchal trends that are generic, and have “no basis” in Islam and the Sharia, Islamic law.

  • Summary: 

    The status of Islam should be clarified if the debate on how to defeat terrorism is ever to bear fruit. Islam, I would argue, is not a religion in the common acceptation of the term as a community of believers dedicated to the loving worship of the Divine, the sanctity of life, and the institution of moral principles governing repentance for sins and crimes, making life on earth a stage toward a higher reincarnation, an ineffable peace, or a confirmatory prelude to eternity in the realm of a righteous and merciful God.

    In fact, Islam is an unrepentant politico-expansionist movement clothed in the trappings of religion and bent on universal conquest by whatever means it can mobilize: deception (taqiyya), social and cultural infiltration, or bloody violence, as its millennial history and authoritative scriptures have proven. (See Koran 13:41, which is meant literally despite the attempt of apologists to launder its purport: “Do they not see that We are advancing in the land, diminishing it by its borders on all sides?”)

  • Summary: 

    "Ghouse argues that all violence and intolerance committed under the banner of Islam is not due to the Quran:"

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/the-source-of-muslim-extremism_us_57...

    Unfortunately, its thesis is built on a faulty premise. Even if every single Muslim was to reject the Hadith and other “secondary books,” that wouldn’t change the fact that the Quran is saturated with violent and intolerant teachings that need no clarification from supplemental literature.

Subscribe to PJ Media