Personally, I prefer to label it fundamentalist Islam, or basic Islam 101.
Rampaging Islamists
by Daniel Pipes
The Washington Times
September 19, 2012
WT title: “Islamic violence advances Shariah law: Is U.S. ready to accept second-class status?”; includes updates
When Muslims take to the streets in nearly 30 countries to engage in various degrees of anti-Western violence, something important is underway. Reflections on what this might mean:
The Rushdie Rules have gone viral: Ayatollah Khomeini’s 1989 masterstroke of imposing a death edict on Salman Rushdie has now spread and become the hum-drum response of Islamists to perceived insults. By telling the West what can and cannot be said about Islam, Khomeini sought to impose Islamic law (the Shari’a) on it. The recent round of violence has mostly taken the form of demonstrations and violence against Western buildings (diplomatic, commercial, educational) in Afghanistan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, China, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Israel & the Palestinian Authority, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Morocco, Nigeria, Pakistan, Qatar, Sudan, Syria (including the American-backed rebels),Tunisia, Turkey, and Yemen as well as in Australia, Belgium, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom. So far, about 30 people have lost their lives. The Iranian and Egyptian governments both want to get their hands on the filmmakers of Innocence of Muslims, an anti-Muhammad film on YouTube they blame for the violence.
Here is a fun game.
1. Find a muslim complaining about the movie on the internet.
2. Ask him to give an example from the movie that is untrue.
3. Stand back. They get really mad when you do this and start hurling the “accusation” that you are a jew.
4. If they try to be cunning and insist that it is you who must provide evidence that it is true- You have won.
Merely respond “GOTCHA!” If there was something they were offended by in the movie or found to be a lie then they would have been able to give an answer the instant the question was asked and would not be bluffing.
5. Prepare to stand back a bit farther at this point.
They don’t answer the question. EVER.
I and a FB freind or two have been trying it and that’s how it always goes.
brilliant!
Sometimes they cite a scene yet don’t say if it’s offensive or untrue. If you prove it’s “accepted”- like the donkey scene or the head between the thighs scene, they then say they meant it was offensive all along.
They also use reflection. If you can’t see how offensive it is then there’s something wrong with you. Though they still don’t provide examples why anything is offensive. You are just a jerk for not seeing whatever it is that they supposedly see – yet don’t tell you about.
That’s happened a couple times too.
Their favorite “example” so far is that you must be a jew.
I believe it was on this very blog that you posted a video exchange between Rep. Alan West and a Muslim. Having failed to answer the Muslim’s questions/comments to his satisfaction, the Muslim retorted: “You have insulted Islam!”
I think we all know what that means. “You have insulted Islam” has become the chorus line of all Muslim reaction to the values of free people. Eventually, somebody is going to write a song about it.