International Civil Liberties Alliance Moderate? Modernist Muslims



Getting them (21st century Muslims) into the open to voice opposition to political Islam, is the aim of the counterjihad. It also means that no dissembling, papering over, lying, of the history, language and doctrine of Islam will be tolerated, by any of us. It means no covering over the naked facts of what Islam really believes, and of the institutions that are internationally recognized, the promotes the same jihad, the same anti-Semistism (Jew hatred) the same sharia, that enslaves people worldwide, and committing one horror after another. Being completely honest about Islam, not denying it’s negative attributes nor papering it over, is crucial if these groups want to be taken seriously.

The American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD) and the American Islamic Leadership Coalition (AILC) have both come out in support of the anti-Jihad film The Third Jihad.  The press releases that relate to AIFD and AILC support for The Third Jihad film can be found HERE andHERE.  This follows calls for the resignation of New York Police Commissioner Ray Kelly.  There have been accusations that the film is ‘Islamophobic’ and that therefore, presumably, its use as a training film by the New York Police Department is example of Islamophobia.

However, at the beginning of The Third Jihad film it is made perfectly clear:

“This is not a film about Islam.  It is about the threat of radical Islam.  Only a small percentage of the world’s 1.3 billion Muslims are radical.”

This makes it very clear that the film is not about Islam but is about Islamism.  The film is even narrated by Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser who is himself a Muslim.  It seems that critics of the film are implying that Muslims who speak out against extremism are Islamophobes too.  Such suggestions are outrageous and show clearly how the term ‘Islamophobia’ is used as a political weapon.    If supporting the film is Islamophobic then perhaps it can be argued that those who oppose it are in effect supporters of Islamism and the Islamist narrative? Where are the members of the political, academic and media establishments when moderate Muslims speak out against extremism?

More here.

10 Responses

  1. However, at the beginning of The Third Jihad film it is made perfectly clear:

    “This is not a film about Islam. It is about the threat of radical Islam. Only a small percentage of the world’s 1.3 billion Muslims are radical.”

    That’s all BS.

    Islam itself is the problem. There is no “radical Islam” and we don’t know, in fact nobody knows, how many of the worlds 1.6 gazillion Muslims support the cause.

    That fact must not be denied and the only Muslim worthy of our trust is the one who becomes an apostate.

  2. Let us consider the hypothetical situation that ALL Muslims at present living in the West, accepted the call to clean up their communities of extremism. They even went further and made the changes in their teachings of the Koran and the jihad. Such an outcome would no doubt come as a relief to many on this site, the government, the MSM, and elsewhere. But I counter, that all such changes were being done merely to protect the ummah while it grows at ever-increasing pace in the West. Once a near majority is achieved, that future generation of Muslims will simply revoke any changes, and return to the traditions of the unchanging and unchangeable Koran i.e., the canonical texts of Islam that cannot be changed, but only protected when under duress. That future generation of Muslims in the UK, or in any Infidel nation, will even praise this generation of Muslims for having done what was necessary to protect Islam.

    Once Muslims are a near majority, they will declare it to be a Muslim area, and enforce sharia, either illegally if they don’t have the numbers across the nation, or legally if they do. In either case, the distinction between the radicals and moderates is meaningless.

  3. Alas, moderate Islam is an imaginary, null and void concept that allows Westerners to project their insecurities with regards to what Islam has in store for them in the long run, making it easier to soothe their minds with a purposely sought lack of knowledge on the subject matter at hand. Deriving naive assumptions from this complacency will cost Western societies dearly. Westerners would do better to scrutinize why anyone would deliberately associate himself with a totalitarian doctrine and still decide not to act on his beliefs, even counteracting nearly all the ‘moral’ imperatives of Islam in private ? One explanation that can be applied to some of these people, can be put into one word: taqiyya. Some Muslims are de facto stealth Jihadis, catering for PC MC idiots’ need to project Western values on their mindset.

    However, the Quran itself also contains provisions with regards to determining who is a genuine Muslim and who isn’t. The Muslim Hypocrite is deemed even worse than the average apostate or infidel in Islam. Apostates are simply killed, whereas Hypocrites are regarded as a type of fifth column in Islam, traitors. Alongside the concepts of shirk and bid’ah, Quranic defined Hypocrisy is at the very core of coercive totalitarianism. Immoral people (Muslim hypocrites, known as Munafiqun in the Quran) are those that want to behave like Muslims outwardly, and at the same time don’t want to attain the all-enveloping moral standards Islam demands of them in their day to day private life. For instance, one can seriously doubt whether Muhammed Ali Jinnah or Pervez Musharraf for instance would’ve been regarded as genuine Muslims by the average Pakistani imam these days, simply because both of them kept dogs. In Jinnah’s case, it has been widely noted that he regularly drank alcohol and even ate pork. Now, any scholar of Islam will actually tell you that this would constitute Hypocrisy as the Quran defines it. Now any Hypocrite that outs himself that way would be severely punished by his co-religionists. In Europe these days, instances have increased whereby Muslims, who couldn’t resist the urge to smoke during Ramadan, were severely beaten by Muslims in their vicinity. Whereas years ago, this was totally unheard of. Now, I believe this is indicative of the augmenting level of Islamic coercion. The same coercion that derives from the Quran’s contents with regards to the hypocrites, these Quranic rules serve as a means of imposing social control and uniformity on Muslims in general to ensure nobody steps out of line. Plus, it is also suggestive of the fact that Islamic puritanism (better known under the moniker Salafism) in the last decade has firmly gained a grasp of the clergy and the mosques in Europe. In some countries with a significant Muslim presence in Western Europe and a history of 4 to 6 decades of Muslim immigration, (like France, Belgium, the Netherlands and Germany) the donning of hijabs by Muslim teenage girls is becoming more wide spread, whereas 10 to 15 years ago, this was exception rather than the general rule, which indicates a tightening grip Muslim patriarchal society has on their womenfolk, as advocated by puritanical Islam.

    Just about any Muslim integrating any aspect of a Western lifestyle into his day to day life could be deemed a Hypocrite and will face the consequences if exposed. Which is enough of a reason for some Muslims to keep burying Western influences in their private life, while outwardly professing total obedience to Islam. Which is why they call themselves Muslim, although they would face serious persecution if exposed. They either belong to the Muslim community by keeping up the pretence towards their co-religionists with their tail between their legs, either they turn to apostasy and become infidel and then incur the terrible wrath of others within their community. (such as honor killings)

    Openly admitting to being a Munafiq is something that no Muslim would ever do. Both taqiyya and Hypocrisy are confounding the issue with regards to so-called ‘moderate’ Islam. The truth is we can’t really distinguish between Stealth Jihadis on the one hand and Westernized Hypocrites on the other, simply because the latter will never openly admit to being Westernized. That’s why Islam = totalitarianism /coercion /uniformity.

  4. What we’re faced with in the West is in fact the very impossibility to get a direct grasp of what goes on within the confines of any Muslim mind. And in the long run, actions speak louder than words. Only those that make their intentions clear from the start, can be really scrutinized,(mainly the Salafis) the others will fly under the radar until the damage has been done.

    There’s no way of telling who’s who. The lines between Munafiqun and Stealth Jihadis are blurred. And that’s because Mohammed really left no stone unturned to make sure Muslims would submit themselves to the all-enveloping coercive doctrine of Islam. Some close the ranks out of necessity and fear, others feed us ‘moderate’ Islam as a taqiyya ruse, and still others covet at least an implicit approval of Stealth Jihad and/or militant Jihad. Therefore, scrutinizing the Munafiqun doesn’t lead us to the rational conclusion that they can be considered as innately “moderate”. The latter term is a designation that has its origins in naive PC MC presumptiveness and that has absolutely no link to rationally or objectively verifiable fact in any way.

    Let’s imagine, for the sake of argument, that I am a Muslim that likes to have a sneaky smoke and an alcoholic drink during Ramadan, and that I could avoid being detected by my fellow Muslims. In such a case, any imam would deem me a Hypocrite if he would know about it. Imagine also, that this Muslim would have no qualms about beating up his wife in private at regular intervals for refusing sex with him. Let’s say that this Muslim would also know perfectly well that the neighbourhood’s imam has said this is perfectly justified according to the Quran. Let’s say that this Muslim also runs a business outlet of some sort, and caters to both infidel and Muslim customers. Let’s imagine this Muslim being outwardly polite to all his infidel customers (for some other Muslims enough of a reason to call him a hypocrite), while in the back of his mind he covets a seething disdain for infidels and a deep frustration with having to tolerate infidel customers in order to sustain a living. Imagine this Muslim being too lazy to pray 5 times a day on the one hand, but is still demanding of his wife to dress modestly according to Quranic tenets when she leaves the house,…etc. Thus, there are countless ways in which a Muslim can be considered a Quranic Hypocrite, both inwardly and outwardly, which in many cases will earn such a person the Western PC misnomer of ‘moderate’. Wrong, because the example shows that:

    1) There are no moderate aspects to the totalitarian ideology called Islam
    2) Any Muslim can decide to integrate non-Islamic ways of living and eclectically choose to adhere to those Islamic core tenets that suit his personal needs and that still don’t tally with Western concepts like separation of Church and State, equality of men and women or an impartial judicial system that guarantees equal rights for all.
    3) The risk of being exposed as a hypocrite has to be avoided. If push comes to shove, a Muslim might even justify his own hypocrisy to his co-religionists to squirm his way out of being branded as a Munafiq, presenting it as a form of deliberate taqiyya he continuously fools Westerners with from day to day.
    4) their outward behaviour doesn’t make them moderate, according to the PC definition. PC idiots believe they can infer from such behaviour that they full well know what goes on in a Muslim’s mind. Which is an ill-conceived assumption in any case. All the leftover Islamic rulings a Hypocrite still adheres to, can’t be other than inherently incompatible with our values and therefore, such behaviour doesn’t make them Westernized or able to fully abide by our norms, standards and values.

    Let’s face it: ‘moderate Muslims’ simply don’t exist !

    1. I’ve always said that as a Muslim gets into closer contact with his/her ‘inner Mohamed’, the more hostile they are to the non-Muslim. I believe that I raised the bar incredibly high Anushirvan, that any Muslim feigning ‘moderation’ would be at great pains to prove it. I fully accept your arguments, and that they should be the standard by which Muslims are judged.

  5. Mind you, this not a personal criticism towards you, in any case. On the other hand, I tend to believe that the whole issue of this precarious “moderacy” Westerners seem to want to project onto Muslims is hardly touched upon sufficiently as a separate subject, even by staunch anti-Jihadists like Robert Spencer et al. I think we should consider to open up such a discussion with the explicit intent to demonstrate that one way or another, some smidgeons of PC MC thinking still inadvertently seep into anti-Islamic criticism as a consequence of pervasice PC in our society, just as much as constituent elements of Islamic totalitarianism keep trickling down in the minds of seemingly modernized Muslims we want to attribute ‘moderacy’ to.

    In any case, I think you do a splendid job on tundratabloids and keep up the good work, I say ! Thumbs up to you.

    1. I didn’t take it as a personal criticism, even if it were, you are of course well within your rights to do so. I fully understood your point, and agree with it. Moderate is not a valid term, it’s a western invention/construct and does not reflect the Muslim mindset. Where I see Muslim ‘moderation’, I see a Muslim who rejects huge portions of the koran, which makes him or her an apostate, not a modernist Muslim.

  6. This film is a fraud, and I myself have wrote it on a comment to the film on youtube, which later was deleted. There’s no moderate Quran and radical Quran. Quran is one, and it is the holy book for ALL muslims. The difference between moderates and radicals is just that moderates (still) do not put in practice their own religion: to fight for the sake of Allah, to kill the apes, pigs, and other non-muslims, and to create the united Umma. The support of muslim organizations to this film is just al-taqiyya in hugue scale. The film itself is nothing but al-taqiyya. And westerners will swallow the lie. And islam will continue to spread under the disguise of moderation.

    Oh, my God…

  7. Indeed, KGS. We are clearly agreeing. I think in a sense, the use of the word moderation and its content is heavily dependent on who is using it, so in a sense it is a semantics issue as well. Such issues occur regularly within the context of Islam criticism on many blogs, and many a time have I encountered tedious discussions on such semantics issues on Jihadwatch for instance, which tend to confound the real issues at hand sometimes. That’s basically why we should keep asserting our own position with regards to these concepts by placing such terms consistently between quotation marks, to distinguish ourselves from PC idiots that really believe there IS such a thing.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.