Andrew Bostom Daniel Pipes Islam 101

ANDY BOSTOM: THE ”ESSENTIALISM” DEVIL AND DANIEL PIPES…….

 

I post the following article by Andrew Bostom because the uncomfortable truth needs to be addressed about ”Islamism”, and because I find his logic and argumentation compelling and without serious rebuttal.

Read also> It depends on what the meaning of ‘Islam’ is

The “Essentialism” Devil and Daniel Pipes

Andrew Bostom

http://www.andrewbostom.org/blog/2013/05/14/the-essentialism-devil-and-daniel-pipes/

One must ask, “What Went Wrong” with Daniel Pipes who now sprays (Edward) Saidian charges of “essentialism” at brave Muslim freethinkers like Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Wafa Sultan, as well as the stalwart Dutch politician Geert Wilders, for simply rejecting his incoherent, self-contradictory mantras on “Islamism”.

said pipes

More here at Andy’s

 

9 Responses

  1. The percentage isn’t the problem, the problem is our own treacherous politicians who purposely overwhelm Western nations with a religious/governmental cult that’s only goal is to destroy our culture and assimilate us into theirs which brings only enslavement of women, violence and death. Daniel Pipes can dance as fast as he can but he cannot hide the violent basic structure of islam.
    There must be very strong laws to protect innocent people in the West from this cult. Once the cultists feel they have the numbers they become violent. Not just sometimes or most of the time but every time they colonize a foreign culture.

  2. I’ve never trusted Daniel Pipes. He’s typical of self-proclaimed analysts like Robert Fisk or Bernard Lewis: amassing decades of knowledge on the ME and still coming up with extraordinarily mealymouthed and baffling shortsightedness with regards to the subjects they claim to have expert knowledge of ?! I don’t trust so-called experts on the ME when they are inherently reluctant to call a spade a spade. Simple as that.

    1. I understand everyone’s angst here, I have mine as well, I take a different track then Daniel, I simply do not believe in the term of Islamism, and that it is indeed Islam, and only Islam that is to blame here. That said, Daniel has been crucial in helping people caught in legal battles for daring to criticize Islam and the leaders of Islamic movements. HE has helped out in court costs and lawyer fees, that shouldn’t be overlooked, he has had a good impact in other realms as well, its the Islamism part I am in deep divides with him (who I know personally). In fact, it’s difficult for me since I know both men really well.

  3. The problem facing everyone, is that as the civil war in the west draws nearer they are going to have to choose sides. And if they perceive themselves as “centrist” or “liberal” (the wishy-washy small “l” liberal, who stands for nothing, apart from thinking they are morally superior to everyone else), they are going to find increasingly that they have no ground on which to stand. Perhaps that is where Pipes finds himself.

    With a muslim population who are only 5% of the population, but are bombing us, assassinating our leaders, threatening the lives of writers, filling our prisons, it can only go downhill. Their numbers double every decade.

    Once the laws start to be implemented, outlawing burkas, branding the koran as hate speech, then their terrorism, violence and criminality will increase.

    There’s no doubt in my mind, that within 5 years, and despite all our precautions, muslims in the west will conduct another 7/7 or Madrid bombing. And really drastic measures are going to have to be taken (and they still won’t be drastic enough to avert the civil war). I think Pipes has stared into the abyss, and the abyss stared back.

    Dr. Bostom’s contributions to the defence of the west for years is of far greater importance than anything Pipes has done. Pipes should be ashamed of himself.

    1. I totally agree with you. In comparison with Bostom, an Islamorealist, Pipes has absolutely no clue. He’ll only be proved wrong in a any way imaginable in the foreseeable future. So much for “intellectual authority/expertise” on his part.

  4. Daniel Pipes has stated: “It’s a mistake to blame Islam, a religion 14 centuries old, for the evil that should be ascribed to militant Islam, a totalitarian ideology less than a century old. Militant Islam is the problem, but moderate Islam is the solution.”

    I say: “Faulty logic. The evil that is ascribed to Islam, a totalitarian ideology, is 14 centuries old. Islam is Islam, no two ways about it.”

    Daniel Pipes has stated: “”Western European societies are unprepared for the massive immigration of brown-skinned peoples cooking strange foods and maintaining different standards of hygiene…All immigrants bring exotic customs and attitudes, but Muslim customs are more troublesome than most.”

    I say: “This is not an issue of general racism. In fact, the opposite is true. Suggesting that Western European societies are probably inherently racist, is presumptuous and highly disdainful on his part. The opposite would be true, even if the issue of “cooking strange foods and maintaining different standards of hygiene” would have some substance ! And troublesome is a euphemism, totally inaccurate to describe the detrimental effects on our societies”

    Daniel Pipes has stated: “my goal in it was to characterize the thinking of Western Europeans, not give my own views. In retrospect, I should either have put the words ‘brown-skinned peoples’ and ‘strange foods’ in quotation marks or made it clearer that I was explaining European attitudes rather than my own.”

    I say: “Daniel Pipes can generalize as much as he wants, he can’t truly explain European attitudes collectively. In his mind, all Europeans are more or less the same. With puts him, ironically, on par with all those PC MC wankers who denounce both the general public in Europe, getting wary of Islam, plus all outspoken Islamorealists as racists. Probably because he wants to safeguard those imaginary moderates he has been describing from racist bigotry in Europe? How noble of him (!)”

  5. Daniel Pipes has stated: ““Arabic-language instruction is inevitably laden with Pan-Arabist and Islamist baggage.”

    I say: “Linking such speech to what goes on in madrassas is one thing, but this is not a specific attribute or trait of the Arabic language, as he SHOULD know. I suggest he tries to explain this to Arab Christians and see what they think about what he has said.”

    FUCK DANIEL PIPES’ “EXPERTISE” !

Leave a Reply

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