“Radical” “Extremist” Islam is mainstream Islam

Many who consider themselves our “betters” continue to tell us that only “radicals” or “extremists” slaughter people for “insulting” Allah and Mohamed or try otherwise to force submission to Islam upon us. They refuse even to use the word “Islamic,” except when pretending that such actions are “not Islamic.” They are wrong and it’s time to wake up. Apathy and ignorance can be deadly.

As explained in my January 10th post, citing and quoting from an article in Catholic World Report by Father James V. Schall, S.J, the Islam we saw in Paris, France is neither “radical” nor “extremist.” It is mainstream Islam, as commanded by the Koran and Sharia law. It is the purpose of this article to explain further why that is the case.

National Review article by Andrew C. McCarthy is titled Don’t Blame the Charlie Hebdo Mass Murder on ‘Extremism.’ It explicates the Sharia law bases of “radical” Islam as set forth in Reliance of the Traveller: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law. It is the authoritative Sharia manual:

Reliance is not some al-Qaeda or Islamic State pamphlet. It is a renowned explication of sharia’s provisions and their undeniable roots in Muslim scripture. In the English translation, before you get to chapter and verse, there are formal endorsements, including one from the International Institute of Islamic Thought — a U.S.-based Muslim Brotherhood think tank begun in the early Eighties (and to which American administrations of both parties have resorted as an exemplar of “moderation”). Perhaps more significantly, there is also an endorsement from the Islamic Research Academy at al Azhar University, the ancient seat of Sunni learning to which President Obama famously turned to co-sponsor his cloyingly deceptive 2009 speech on relations between Islam and the West. [Emphasis added.]

In their endorsement, the al-Azhar scholars wrote:

We certify that the . . . translation corresponds to the Arabic original and conforms to the practice and faith of the orthodox Sunni Community. . . . There is no objection to printing it and circulating it. . . . May Allah give you success in serving Sacred Knowledge and the religion.

There could be no more coveted stamp of scholarly approval in Islam.

Mr. McCarthy’s article provides many quotations from Reliance. Here are some of them:

Apostasy from Islam is “the ugliest form of unbelief” for which the penalty is death (“When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed”). (Reliance o8.0 & ff.) [Emphasis added.]

Apostasy occurs not only when a Muslim renounces Islam but also, among other things, when a Muslim appears to worship an idol, when he is heard “to speak words that imply unbelief,” when he makes statements that appear to deny or revile Allah or the prophet Mohammed, when he is heard “to deny the obligatory character of something which by consensus of Muslims is part of Islam,” and when he is heard “to be sarcastic about any ruling of the Sacred Law.” (Reliance o8.7; see also p9.0 & ff.)

Jihad means to war against non-Muslims. (Reliance o9.0.) [Emphasis added.]

It is an annual requirement to donate a portion of one’s income to the betterment of the ummah (an obligation called zakat, which is usually, and inaccurately, translated as “charity”); of this annual donation, one-eighth must be given to “those fighting for Allah, meaning people engaged in Islamic military operations for whom no salary has been allotted in the army roster. . . . They are given enough to suffice them for the operation even if they are affluent; of weapons, mounts, clothing and expenses.” (Reliance, h8.1–17.) [Emphasis added.]

As commanded in the aforementioned Sura 9:29, non-Muslims are permitted to live in an Islamic state only if they follow the rules of Islam, pay the non-Muslim poll tax, and comply with various conditions designed to remind them that they have been subdued, such as wearing distinctive clothing, keeping to one side of the street, not being greeted with “Peace be with you” (“as-Salamu alaykum”), not being permitted to build as high as or higher than Muslims, and being forbidden to build new churches, recite prayers aloud, “or make public displays of their funerals or feast-days.” (Reliance o11.0 & ff.) [Emphasis added.]

The penalty for spying against Muslims is death. (Reliance p50.0 & ff; p74.0 & ff.)

The penalty for homosexual activity (“sodomy and lesbianism”) is death. (Reliance p17.0 & ff.) [Emphasis added.]

A woman is required to be obedient to her husband and is prohibited from leaving the marital home without permission; if permitted to go out, she must conceal her figure or alter it “to a form unlikely to draw looks from men or attract them.” (Reliance p42.0 & ff.) [Emphasis added.]

A woman has no right of custody of her child from a previous marriage when she remarries “because married life will occupy her with fulfilling the rights of her husband and prevent her from tending to the child.” (Reliance m13.4.) [Emphasis added.]

The penalty for theft is amputation of the right hand. (Reliance o14.0.)

The penalty for accepting interest (“usurious gain”) is death (i.e., to be considered in a state of war against Allah). (Reliance p7.0 & ff.)

The testimony of a woman is worth half that of a man. (Reliance o24.7.) [Emphasis added.]

If a case involves an allegation of fornication (including rape), “then it requires four male witnesses.” (Reliance o24.9.) [Emphasis added.]

The establishment of a caliphate is obligatory, and the caliph must be Muslim and male. “The Prophet . . . said, ‘Men are already destroyed when they obey women.’” (Reliance o25.0 & ff; see also p28.0, on Mohammed’s condemnation of “masculine women and effeminate men.”) [Emphasis added.]

Great Zeus! It almost as bad as the (alleged) “Republican war on women,” about which many “feminists” complain. There is no “Republican war on women.” Islam and Sharia exist and are growing. It does seem at least a tad strange that many quite vocal “feminists” remain silent about the Sharia laws imposed on millions of their sisters. Perhaps they should savor those quaint laws, personally, for a month or three and then (if still alive) return to tell us of their experiences.

Mr. McCarthy concludes,

This anti-liberty, supremacist, repulsively discriminatory, and sadly mainstream interpretation of Islam must be acknowledged and confronted. In its way, that is what Charlie Hebdo had been attempting to do — while, to their lasting shame, governments in the United States and Europe have been working with Islamist states to promote sharia blasphemy standards. That needs to end. The future must not belong to those who brutalize free expression in the name of Islam. [Emphasis added.]

Brutalizing free expression is bad enough. But that is not all that Islam tries to do to us. In the following video, Sean Hannity interviews Imam Anjem Choudary, who lives and preaches in Londonstan. As the Imam explains, “Islam” does not mean peace. It means total submission.

In the next video, Mr. Hannity and guests discuss the threat of “radical” Islam. It should, however, be referred to simply as Islam, because it is not radical; it is mainstream:

In a generally facetious article, Bernard Goldberg suggested that Muslims who disapprove of Islamic slaughter and demands for submission should engage in a million man march against them in Paris. Here is an also facetious video of the Million Muslim march as it happened. Watch closely.

I saw only one Muslim, and he was cleverly disguised as a pigeon.

Imam Obama frequently uses the phrase “on the wrong side of history.” He doubtless considers “Islamophobes” to be among those on the wrong side. There are, however, few if any “Islamophobes,” because the term means an irrational fear of Islam. Anyone other than a Muslim, who is capable of rational, reality based analysis and even occasionally indulges in it with respect to Islam, is very afraid of it. Fear, however, is not a solution and can lead to submission, the meaning and goal of Islam. We recently saw submission by most of the “legitimate news” media, which declined to republish any of the Charlie Hedbo cartoons, even as news. They were news, dammit, because they were the basis for the Charlie Hedbo slaughters.

Steve Emerson, of the Investigative Project on Terrorism, contends that Europe is finished. I am afraid that he is correct.

In America, there may still be time to deal with Islam to prevent it from gaining ascendancy as it has in much of Europe. The first steps — taken thus far by very few — are to recover from denial and apathy, to recognize the problem and give it a name: Islam. Not “extremist” or “radical” Islam. That will be a worthy beginning, but it is not sufficient.

Appeasement won’t work. Until we find and implement viable ways to deal with the Islamic problem, there will be less and less peace as we understand it, and more and more Islamic “peace,” in our time.

I offered some suggestions here. Comments suggesting additional or alternative ways to deal with the Islamic problem will be greatly appreciated.

About danmillerinpanama

I was graduated from Yale University in 1963 with a B.A. in economics and from the University of Virginia School of law, where I was the notes editor of the Virginia Law Review in 1966. Following four years of active duty with the Army JAG Corps, with two tours in Korea, I entered private practice in Washington, D.C. specializing in communications law. I retired in 1996 to sail with my wife, Jeanie, on our sailboat Namaste to and in the Caribbean. In 2002, we settled in the Republic of Panama and live in a very rural area up in the mountains. I have contributed to Pajamas Media and Pajamas Tatler. In addition to my own blog, Dan Miller in Panama, I an an editor of Warsclerotic and contribute to China Daily Mail when I have something to write about North Korea.
This entry was posted in Apathy, Appeasement, Christians, Eurabia, Foreign policy, Freedom, Hate speech, Human rights, Immigration, Islam, Islamic Caliphate, Islamic slaughter, Islamophobia, Jews, Korans, Left, Media, Multicuralism, Muslim supremacy, Muslims, Obama, Obama Nation, Peace and Love, Peace in our time, Political Correctness, Religion, War on women and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to “Radical” “Extremist” Islam is mainstream Islam

  1. Pingback: Islamic “peace,” Imam Obama and multiculturalism |

  2. boudicabpi says:

    Reblogged this on BPI reblog and commented:
    “Radical” “Extremist” Islam is mainstream Islam

  3. Tom Carter says:

    All Muslims are not the same, in general, just as all Christians are not the same. Depending on their individual beliefs, their belief system (simplified, sunni or shia), their nationality, and other factors their views of what jihad is and should be and their propensity to violence vary greatly.

    To think that all Muslims are violent extremists is like thinking that all Christians dance with snakes, speak in tongues, and writhe around on the floor in trances. Muslims and Christians alike will tolerate, to a degree, the weirdos in their midst, but that doesn’t mean that they agree with them.

    I’ve lived among and worked with quite a few Muslims, and in my experience they’re like any other group of people–mostly good guys, but with a few assholes mixed in.

    The best way to deal with islamic terrorism is to approach it as a problem of specific people performing or materially supporting acts of terrorism. Root ’em out and kill ’em. That means good intelligence and direct action, along with restrictive immigration into the U.S., monitoring of Muslim activities in the U.S., following the money, and zero tolerance for things like sharia law. It doesn’t mean fighting stupid, endless wars in places like Iraq and Afghanistan.

    • Tom,

      There are secular Muslims, just as there are secular Christians and Jews. There are also religious Muslims, just as there are religious Christians and Jews. I suspect, but do not know, that Muslims face substantially more peer and other pressures to be religious than do Christians and Jews.

      Today’s religious Muslims adhere to the Koran and its teachings and support Sharia law, just as today’s religious Christians and Jews follow the teachings of their holy texts. Unlike today’s religious Muslims, today’s religious Christians and Jews neither slaughter others for insulting their God or their prophets by ridicule or otherwise. Nor, unlike religious Muslims, do they approve of and support any who do; I am not aware of any for Christians to support, even if they wished to do so.

      To think that all Muslims are violent extremists is like thinking that all Christians dance with snakes, speak in tongues, and writhe around on the floor in trances. Muslims and Christians alike will tolerate, to a degree, the weirdos in their midst, but that doesn’t mean that they agree with them.

      Snake eaters put themselves at risk but otherwise do little harm; Islamists slaughter other humans while seeking martyrdom and eternal bliss with their virgins. There are also many more Muslims who are jihadists themselves, or who approve of and support jihad, than there are Christians who play with snakes as part of their religion or approve of and support those who do.

      However, it must be acknowledged that some religious Christian “terrorists” do oppose paying (per ObamaScare) for abortions sought by their employees, and some even go so far as to oppose tax payer funded abortions. Not only can’t I put them in the same category as Islamic terrorists, I wholeheartedly agree with their positions.

      The best way to deal with Islamic terrorism is to approach it as a problem of specific people performing or materially supporting acts of terrorism. Root ‘em out and kill ‘em. That means good intelligence and direct action, along with restrictive immigration into the U.S., monitoring of Muslim activities in the U.S., following the money, and zero tolerance for things like sharia law. It doesn’t mean fighting stupid, endless wars in places like Iraq and Afghanistan.

      Obama refuses to acknowledge that such a thing as “Islamic terrorism” even exists. He denies that it does because, since Islam is the “religion of peace,” terror is not Islamic.

      As to material support for terrorism, the Islamic Republic of Iran is a major supporter of terrorism and continuously calls for the obliteration of Israel. “We” are seeking ways to ease its path to getting (or keeping) nukes, while eliminating economic sanctions.

      Saudi Arabia, an Islamic state as well as an ally, recently began to administer one thousand lashes, mandated to be severe, fifty each week, to a man who insulted Islam by writing that freedom of religion would be good. Few seem to care. Meanwhile, many abroad and in the U.S. are horrified by the “torture” in which the U.S. engaged during “enhanced interrogation.” Saudi Arabia is among our coalition of the unwilling against the Islamic State and its cohorts.

      Our Islamic ally Turkey? Also hardly a bastion of freedom and democracy, while also a member of our coalition of the unwilling. Qatar is also both an ally and a major state sponsor of terrorism.

      The Obama administration (unsuccessfully) pressured Israel to accept Qatar and Turkey as “honest brokers” in the “peace process” with Hamas and Fatah and to yield to their many demands, which would have resulted in the death of Israel, the only free and democratic nation in the region.

      We are not going to root them out and kill any of them; “we” help them instead.

      Domestically, our intelligence apparatus is greatly restrained because religious “profiling” of Muslims is prohibited. We certainly are not going to impose restrictive immigration on Muslims, monitor their activities in the U.S. because they are Muslim or show “zero tolerance” for Sharia law. Doing so would be deemed “Islamophobic.”

      Unless and until our “leaders” and “betters” recognize that Islamic terrorism is the problem, and publicly articulate that it is, we will continue to follow Europe down the spiral drain. As to “stupid wars,” they will not diminish Islamic terrorism until we recognize that it is Islamic. Even if we were to do that, rules of engagement based on Obama’s principles of community organizing don’t and won’t work.

      • Tom Carter says:

        Not to drag this out forever, it’s just that I don’t think most Muslims support violent jihad/terrorism. If we make the mistake of thinking that they do, we lose the ability to enlist decent Muslims in the effort to defuse their more violent brethren.

        I agree that if we’re going to effectively fight islamic terrorism, we have to do it effectively and remorselessly, with rules of engagement (writ large) that permit useful engagement. If they choose to hide among civilians, then civilians die. That’s their choice.

  4. Paul H. Lemmen says:

    Reblogged this on A Conservative Christian Man.

  5. Centinel2012 says:

    Reblogged this on Centinel2012 and commented:
    Islam itself is killing, rape, plunder and evil — there maybe some that don’t practice Islam and are not bad people but them for this small group they are by definition not Muslims either.

  6. J.G.Lord says:

    Reblogged this on JamesLordsBlog and commented:
    well one more person speaking out and saying what is in our face everyday but we are blind and deaf to the truth thanks to the mainstream media.

  7. Pingback: “Radical” “Extremist” Islam is mainstream Islam |

  8. I have made this same argument at so many blogs. The so-called “extremists” are in fact the true orthodox practitioners of Islam. They follow the Koran to the letter. Most people who call themselves Muslims are not orthodox Muslims and they know it. This why the “moderates” have such a hard time speaking out against those that do follow the Koran’s dictates.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s