"Muslims must de-link Islam from terrorism." Thus has concluded some hang-wringing Malaysian commission that recently published their findings. First time I read this, I howled with laughter. Are Muslims, only now, belatedly realizing that this is a problem?
(Bernama) -- The Muslim world must address the current association of Muslims with terrorism, militancy and intolerance and take steps to delink them, the commission that drew up the vision for the Islamic Development Bank said.Wow, I simply can't imagine how that association came about. Maybe it's all those civilians that have been slaughtered in the name of Jihad in places like Madrid, London, New York, Bali, Sudan, India, Iraq, Nigeria, and a thousand other places. Maybe its because gay and apostates in Dar al Islam have to flee or hide for their lives. Maybe it's the cartoon jihad, Sudan's genocidal regime, or Iran's venomous rhetoric.
"When religious teachings are manipulated and exploited to legitimise and incite terrorist acts, the religion and virtually the entire Ummah that abhors terrorism pay a heavy price," the commission said in a report Thursday.
Would the esteemed commission care to explain, in detail, on how the Jihadists are wrongly interpreting Islamic teachings? Of course not--we just have to take their word for it. And while this commission asserts (with absolutely no proof) that 'virtually the entire Ummah abhors terrorism', we infidels can truthfully state that at least a significantly minority of Muslims support the Global Jihad. Even if it's only 10% (Prager's estimate), and it may be much higher than that, that's not a trivial amount of support for an evil cause.
One heck of an understatement, if I ever heard one. So, should we be grateful that the Muslims are now, begrudgingly, confessing some responsibility, or should we lament the fact that they refuse to accept the lion's share of the blame?
The report stresses that Muslims must acknowledge that they too are responsible to some extent for such a state of affairs.
Now, I have no certain way of knowing if this commission is yet another example of Islamic cognitive dissonance or just another tale of taqiyya. Assuming for the moment that the aforementioned commission is well meaning (quite an assumption, I know), I have a few questions (courtesy of Investor's Business Daily) for these people, if they are serious about "de-linking Islam" from the three horsemen of terrorism, militancy and intolerance.
- Is it true that 26 chapters of the Quran deal with jihad, a fight able-bodied believers are obligated to join (Surah 2:216), and that the text orders Muslims to "instill terror into the hearts of the unbeliever" and to "smite above their necks" (8:12)?
- Is the "test" of loyalty to Allah not good acts or faith in general, but martyrdom that results from fighting unbelievers (47:4) — the only assurance of salvation in Islam (4:74; 9:111)?
- Are the sins of any Muslim who becomes a martyr forgiven by the very act of being slain while slaying the unbelievers (4:96)?
- Are those unable to do jihad — such as women or the elderly — required to give "asylum and aid" to those who do fight unbelievers in the cause of Allah (8:74)?
- Does Islam advocate expansion by force? And is the final command of jihad, as revealed to Muhammad in the Quran, to conquer the world in the name of Islam (9:29)?
- Is Islam the only religion that does not teach the Golden Rule (48:29)? Does the Quran instead teach violence and hatred against non-Muslims, specifically Jews and Christians (5:50)?
I would certainly love to hear this commission, or any other Muslim, honestly answer these questions. I know we infidels already have. But I am not going to hold my breath.