One of the biggest fall outs of the intellectual decay and moral cowardness that has afflicted the western world in modern times is the increasing number of intellectuals who are no longer willing to speak truthfully on an ever expanding number of issues for a variety of very disquieting reasons. When it comes to issues dealing with religion, or more specifically Islam, many of these intellectuals will do their utmost to try and convince the general population that those who carry out Islamic acts of aggression and terror in the west are simply misinterpreting their religion and that they are merely extremists bringing their faith into disrepute. In fact this need to constantly exonerate an ideology which is almost alone in producing terrorists today has become such a common occurrence that one can almost describe it as a systematic pattern, just as A comes before B and night follows day, the excuses follow every single act of Islamic terror. In fact it has gone so far that people in the west are expecting to be presented with such feeble excuses in the aftermath of Islamic barbarity.
The latest such grovelling exculpation was offered by the British Prime Minister David Cameron and the mayor of London, Boris Johnson who both maintained that the latest Islamic terrorist act in the UK had nothing to do with Islam, despite the fact that the two Muslims perpetrators who hacked to death the off-duty British soldier while chanting Allahu Akbar and then preceded to justify their deeds in front of a camera by referring to the Koran and perceived western aggression in Islamic countries. An appropriate question to ask after having had to witness such exceptional example of cognitive dissonance from the two esteemed British politicians would have to be; what exactly is the true nature of the religion of Islam? What exactly is the difference between the ideology of the so called extremists and the majority of the ostensibly peaceful Muslims? One would assume that individuals who are making such statements, especially those who appear in the media on a regular basis, is at least qualified to speak on these issues and that they have the necessary data to back up their claims. One would also assume that they have an extensive knowledge of the religion itself and of the ideology of those that they prefer to label as extremists.
Those who maintain that there is a distinct ideological difference between the extremists and ordinary Muslims should really be pushed hard on this issue and not simply have their remarks taken at face value by gullible journalists who have no intention of pursuing the issue in an honest manner, which sadly is the case today. Nor should the questions merely deal with the difference in behaviour, but rather about the difference in religious ideology and doctrine. What exactly is it that the extremists are misinterpreting in order to justify their gruesome deeds and are these perceived misinterpretations, according to these esteemed intellectuals, completely at odds with standard Islamic doctrine? Anyone who has bothered to pick up a copy of the Koran and actually read it from start to finish knows that it is an aggressive and immensely hostile book. It is also a book that has numerous hateful verses that deals specifically with the killing and subjugation of non-Muslims. This is a fact that cannot be contested or somehow simply swept under the rug. Appropriate questions to ask are as follow;
Are these hate filled verses deliberately being toned down by mainstream Muslims and scholars as insignificant or perhaps even discredited as relics from a completely different time and era where different values and norms were in vogue? Are the mainstream Islamic nations distancing themselves from these verses? Is the Muslim world rejecting these verses or are they in fact acting upon them and doing their utmost to emulate them?
These questions have to be answered in order to get an idea of what is considered mainstream and acceptable today in the Islamic world. Are there movements in the Islamic world that are vehemently opposed to the more aggressive passages of the Koran and that are proposing that these should be removed altogether, or are such movements pretty much nonexistent?
Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders made a short movie, Fitna, in 2008 which he posted online. In it he highlighted the hate filled Koranic verses that Islamic terrorists all over the world use to justify their attacks, and which they use to fuel their hatred for non-Muslims. In it Wilders has juxtaposed footage of Muslims carrying out terrorist attacks in Europe and the USA and the relevant verses from the Koran. Towards the end of the film Mr. Wilders encourages the Muslim world to purge the Koran of these evil verses and cast aside its hostility towards non-Muslims and take the plunge into the modern age. One can hear, but not see a page being torn from a book, in this case a telephone directory, upon which Mr. Wilders informs the viewers that it is not up to him, but the Islamic world to carry out the necessary reformation of Islam.
A fatwa, or a death sentence was issued for Geert Wilders by the senior leadership of Al Qaeda for having produced the movie. The movie received widespread condemnation from both Islamic and Western countries and numerous Islamic organisations and individual Muslims in the west who wanted to see Wilders severely punished for having offended Islam. Attempts were even made to boycott the Netherlands and Geert Wilders was subsequently refused entry into the UK to attend a screening of the movie on the spurious grounds that his presences in the UK would infuriate the Muslim community. The hostile response to the release of movie, which in reality is nothing but an suggestion to the Muslim world to reform their religion and rid itself of Islamic doctrine that encourages hatred towards non-Muslims, is a powerful reminder of the Islamic world’s view on these matters, such as their view on the overall message of the Koran and their unwillingness to reform Islam and bring the religion into the modern era. The desire to carry out this process is simply not there, which subsequently means that western liberal apologists who keep insisting that Islamic terrorist who commits atrocities in the name of Islam have nothing to do with the religion have a monumental credibility problem. If ordinary Muslims are unwilling to disregard or ignore these verses that teach them to hate non-Muslims then there is simply no evidence whatsoever to suggest that the Islamic terrorist who keep attacking and killing in the name of Islam are extremists who are merely misinterpreting or bringing the religion of Islam into disrepute. They are in fact true representatives of the religion.
It is true however that only a small minority of the Muslim community in Europe carry out such attacks, but that’s not really a convincing argument to rely upon as irrefutable evidence that the great majority of Muslims reject such acts or consequently don’t believe that such acts are mandated by the Koran. Studies carried out in Britain have shown that a large portion of the UK Muslim community support Islamic terrorism and would welcome the introduction of Sharia. It is also worth mentioning in this context a study carried out in the USA which concluded that out of 100 randomly selected Mosques in the country only 19 sold literature and other material that didn’t encourage or condone terrorism and violent behaviour, that is of course apart from the Koran itself which actively encourages both. The study also concluded that the mosques which sold such violent material were also very vocal about their support for terrorism and the funding of terrorism. There are also numerous of examples of Mosques all around Europe that claim to be moderate and embrace western values, but which upon closer examination, through undercover reporting with hidden cameras, have been exposed to be anything but moderate. The most famous case was documented in the British TV documentary ‘Undercover Mosque’, but there are also similar examples from many other countries in Europe.
Still the most accurate way of identifying Islam’s views on these issues is to look at the Islamic world itself and examine the values and morals that it promotes. When we do so we find that many Islamic nations are run in strict accordance with the Koran and traditional Islamic doctrine and that the Koran is relied upon heavily in both legal and criminal proceedings. It also goes without saying that it is strictly forbidden to mock or question the teachings of the founder of the religion, Muhammad, in these countries. We also find that in areas of conflict and war where Muslims are involved, most noticeable in the Muslim world, the more devout practitioners are carrying out acts that are very similar to those that we in the west label terrorist attacks. As a matter of fact since 9/11 - 2001 more than 20 000 Islamic terrorist attacks have occurred throughout the world.
When examining the evidence out there that are available to us, such as Muslim’s reluctance to reform their own religion, their reactions to anyone who even hint about such actions, the way Muslim majority countries are being run, the way they react whenever someone offended their religion and the way non-Muslims are being treated in these countries, it is not unreasonable to conclude that Islamic terrorists are not misinterpreting the Koran, nor are they misrepresenting their religion whenever they are carrying out terrorists attacks. They are in fact following their religion to the letter. This is a fact that needs to be relentlessly pointed out in the west and we need to do away with the standard mantra coming from liberal western intellectuals whenever Islamic terrorist attacks occur. The first step towards defeating Islamic terrorism is to realize that it is in fact Islamic terrorism and not simply terrorist acts incorrectly attributed to Islam.