StatCounter

Thursday 5 July 2007

Shh don't mention the "M" word

Apparently Gordon Brown has "banned ministers from using the word 'Muslim' in ?connection with the "terrorism crisis" also the new Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, said “Let us be clear – terrorists are criminals, whose victims come from all walks of life, communities and religions. Terrorists attack the values shared by all law-abiding citizens. As a Government, as communities, as individuals, we need to ensure that the message of the terrorists is rejected”. Very clearly not all Muslims are terrorists just as in the 1970s and 1980s not all Irish Catholics were terrorists. However the current terrorist threat does come from terrorists who are acting on their interpretation of Islam.

Atlas Shrugs puts forward an interesting point - "Prime Minister Gordon Brown keeps repeating that the attacks have nothing to do with Islam - but, at the same time, keeps inviting "Muslim community leaders" to Downing Street to discuss how to prevent attacks. If the attacks have nothing to do with Islam, why invite Muslim "leaders" rather than Buddhist monks?"

It is no good politicians and Muslim Community Leaders saying Islam is the "Religion of Peace" and that's the end of it. People can read and more and more are aware of the teachings of the Qur’aan. Yes there are lines in the Qur’aan that declare the sanctity of life, "innocent life" see my previous article about that phase. It is an unfortunate and complex truth that Islam can be interpreted as condoning violence against the unbeliever.


Please read this article by Hassan Butt in today's Telegraph. It is his explanation of what motivates the current British Jihadi Network. Some extracts follow:

1) "though many British extremists are angered by the deaths of fellow Muslim across the world, what drove me and many others to plot acts of extreme terror within Britain and abroad was a sense that we were fighting for the creation of a revolutionary worldwide Islamic state that would dispense Islamic justice."


2) "How do Islamic radicals justify such terror in the name of their religion?

There isn't enough room to outline everything here, but the foundation of extremist reasoning rests upon a model of the world in which you are either a believer or an infidel.

Formal Islamic theology, unlike Christian theology, does not allow for the separation of state and religion: they are considered to be one and the same.

For centuries, the reasoning of Islamic jurists has set down rules of interaction between Dar ul-Islam (the Land of Islam) and Dar ul-Kufr (the Land of Unbelief) to cover almost every matter of trade, peace and war.

But what radicals and extremists do is to take this two steps further. Their first step has been to argue that, since there is no pure Islamic state, the whole world must be Dar ul-Kufr (The Land of Unbelief).

Step two: since Islam must declare war on unbelief, they have declared war upon the whole world."


3) "Along with many of my former peers, I was taught by Pakistani and British radical preachers that this reclassification of the globe as a Land of War (Dar ul-Harb) allows any Muslim to destroy the sanctity of the five rights that every human is granted under Islam: life, wealth, land, mind and belief.

In Dar ul-Harb, anything goes, including the treachery and cowardice of attacking civilians. "

4) "most Muslim institutions in Britain just don't want to talk about theology.

They refuse to broach the difficult and often complex truth that Islam can be interpreted as condoning violence against the unbeliever - and instead repeat the mantra that Islam is peace and hope that all of this debate will go away."


So Gordon Brown and the rest of the political elite in this country need to wake up and smell the qahwah (coffee in Arabic). Ignoring the issue will not help, in fact I am unsure as to what will help.


That was the end of this article and then I remembered this article from the Telegraph at the end of March this year. It reported that "The European Union has drawn up guidelines advising government spokesmen to refrain from linking Islam and terrorism in their statements. Brussels officials have confirmed the existence of a classified handbook which offers "non-offensive" phrases to use when announcing anti-terrorist operations or dealing with terrorist attacks.
Banned terms are said to include "jihad", "Islamic" or "fundamentalist" The article continues:
"Details on the contents of the lexicon remain secret, but British officials stressed that it is there as a helpful aid "providing context" for civil servants making speeches or giving press conferences. "We are fully signed up to this, but it is not binding," said one."

I would say unbelievable but really it is totally believable that the EU is at least partially behind this ridiculous notion.

No comments: