Saturday, June 25, 2011

Islam equals micromanagement of every part of one's life

Another pertinent reminder that Islam does not recognize privacy, or one's personal freedom, or free will. "Fatwa Council to decide on Halal Beer", from The Star, 25 June 2011:

KUALA LUMPUR: The National Fatwa Council is to decide on whether a beer branded as halal being sold in the country is permissible.

Principal assistant director of the dakwah division of the Islamic Development Department (Jakim), Mat Ali Sarbini, said the beer "is regarded as illicit until and unless the council rules otherwise."

He said samples of the beer were being analysed at a university laboratory.

University laboratory, heh. Not only is your freedom taken away, but government resources are wasted on ridiculous and wasteful things like testing beer in a lab. I suppose the Malaysian government chemists and lab techs have nothing better to do. Islam wages jihad -- both peaceful and otherwise -- until it becomes the government.

Islam, by presenting rules ad nauseum on every conceivable aspect of life, renders all people as children, legal minors, or as permanent wards of the all-encompassing state. Or did Obama leave that part out of his Cairo "I love Islam" Speech?

Wednesday, June 22, 2011

FrontPage Magazine interviews The Anti Jihadist

FrontPage Magazine editor Jamie Glazov has published his interview with yours truly as of today.  Entitled "Islam's Persecution of Christians in Malaysia", the article focuses on Malaysia's less-than-stellar treatment of religious minorities, specifically Christians and their shabby treatment at the hands of the dominant Muslims. The full interview is here.

Friday, June 17, 2011

Islam versus Islamism - a distinction without a difference?

By the Anti Jihadist

When reading anything regarding Islam and Islamic terrorism -- something more and more common nowadays -- it doesn't take long to find references to 'Islamism', 'Islamists', and 'radical Islam', especially in the politically conservative side of the blogosphere. Most often, these words are mentioned when observers and pundits speculate as to the motives of the Muslim men (and sometimes women) who carry out, or attempt to carry out, their various terrorist atrocities. This sort of thinking represents a vast improvement over the usual politically correct narrative, namely that (Islamic) terrorism is caused by some combination of poverty, unemployment, so-called 'Islamophobia', US foreign policy, and the like. However, even if we accept the 'Islamism' explanation for Islamic terrorism, we are still short of a full and complete understanding of the motives of those who carry out this evil.

Here are some typical ways of how conservative commentators mention 'Islamism' and/or 'Islamist':

  • A recent article at American Thinker is entitled "The Egyptian Revolt and Imperial Islamism" (link)
  • "Islamist terror is in fact driven by a vile, totalitarian, hallucinatory ideology - Islamism." (link)
  • "Islamism is an ideology that demands man's complete adherence to the sacred law of Islam and rejects as much as possible outside influence..." (Daniel Pipes)
Daniel Pipes' quote comes from his article "Distinguishing between Islam and Islamism" dated June 30, 1998. Pipes characterizes 'Islamism' as a totalitarian ideology that, at the time of the article was written, ruled three countries (Afghanistan, Iran and Sudan).  He further describes 'Islamism' as a "...huge change from traditional Islam."  To support this assertion, Pipes says that 'traditional Islam' is when a person is committed to personally following 'sacred' laws, whereas 'Islamism' is an ideology geographically delineated in certain countries, and all persons in said jurisdictions are compelled, presumably by an organized central authority, to follow such 'sacred laws'. Pipes' implication here is, 'Islamism' is inherently political, whereas 'traditional Islam' is not.

Yet Saudi Arabia, a nation long noted for its strict adherence to Islamic law, a country which proudly proclaims the Quran as its constitution, is not listed as an 'Islamist' state by Mr. Pipes, at least as of his 1998 article. One might ask, are there any appreciable political or religious differences between Saudi Arabia and Sudan? Both are totalitarian states, with Shariah enshrined as the law of the land.  Both feature tyrannical, non-elected governments. Both employ ruthless religious and lifestyle police apparatuses with sweeping and arbitrary powers of arrest, detention, torture and imprisonment. Both have long-standing, atrocious human rights records. Yet one is characterized by Daniel Pipes as 'Islamist', and not the other. But Saudi Arabia, a nominal US ally, was home of most of the 9-11 terror team, a team which struck at the very heart of the 'Great Satan' in both New York and Washington to commit acts of mass murder, a 'victory' hailed by many Muslims and 'Islamists' alike. Isn't this precisely the sort of violent, aggressive act the very raison d'être of 'Islamism'? 

Pipes' own article discusses how Muslims, in the mere span of a single century, and in accordance with the wishes of their prophet, seized control of a sprawling tract of territory from Spain to India. In other words, the followers of Mohammed built an empire, not only an innate political act, but a quintessentially imperialistic enterprise. When the 'righteously guided' caliphs conquered much of the world, and ruled its conquered peoples with a heavy hand, should this be described as 'Islamism' or 'Islam' in action? Are there in fact any appreciable differences between Islam and Islamism? Along similar lines, are there any differences between a Muslim and an 'Islamist', or between a Muslim and a 'radical or fundamental Muslim'? If one posits the evil twin 'Islamism', then one must also posit some sort of non-totalitarian, non-imperialistic 'good' Islam, which hence must be supported somewhere in Islamic scripture.

The Quran itself, the very heart of Islamic ideology, is a document that devotes much of its length to the treatment of Muslims and non Muslims. The Quran says that Muslims are fated to rule the world, and everyone in it. While Jesus of Christianity says, "My Kingdom is not of this world," Muslims are explicitly commanded to do otherwise, to make the world an Islamic kingdom. In other words, the Quran is an inherently political document. Consequently, there is no separation between mosque and state in core Islamic texts. In traditional Islam, dating back to the time of its prophet, the spiritual and the political are one.  

Drawing distinctions between Islam and its '-ism' is a false dichotomy. There is no political Islam, no 'Islamism', no 'Islamists' -- there are only Islam and Muslims. The so-called 'radical', 'fundamentalist' or 'militant' Muslims, the 'Islamists', and indeed the terrorists, are the ones faithfully practicing the dictums of Islam, exactly as Islam's founder intended.

The Anti Jihadist writes for Jihad Watch, FrontPage Magazine, and Infidel Bloggers Alliance.

Wednesday, June 15, 2011

Now blogging at Jihad Watch

I'm pleased to report that Robert Spencer has invited me to join the contributor team at Jihad Watch. Have a look at my first post as part of the Jihad Watch team.

From this point forward, I will be putting most of my efforts into Jihad Watch and other ongoing blogging ventures. I will attempt to post new material here at my 'original' blog, Pedestrian Infidel, from time to time, as the opportunities present themselves.

My special thanks goes to the Malaysian government, who by blocking this site, 'encouraged' me to take my writing and blogging efforts further afield.

And thanks again, Robert!

Thursday, June 09, 2011

At Jihad Watch - The Myth of Liberal Islam in Malaysia (and anywhere else)

Robert Spencer' Jihad Watch has my latest piece about how Islam is a 'moderate' religion is a fraud, a lie eagerly spread by Malaysian taqiyya masters like Mr.Hafidz Baradom. Have a look.

Saturday, June 04, 2011

Feedback on 'Why Muslim cultures lag behind"

Why Muslim cultures lag behind is bouncing around the blogosphere, garnering plenty of attention and plenty of eyeballs. 

Family Security Matters (here) has some good analysis, as well as constructive criticism of my work.  A brief quote:

The Jihad Watch article is correct and well-intentioned, but woefully lacking itself in explaining why the West has surpassed Islam. Without establishing the broader context of why and how innovation, "devotion," skilled labor and so on exist in the West but not in Muslim culture, the list seems wholly arbitrary. One could easily substitute "honesty," "diet" or "education" for any of the others, or simply add them to the list.

It's good that the article has managed to stimulate a lot of thinking and analysis.  Many minds thinking on a problem is precisely one of the net's strengths.

Friday, June 03, 2011

Yours truly in Front Page Magazine

I've finally gotten my first article published in Front Page Magazine -- Why Muslim cultures lag behind. My sincere thanks to FrontPageMag's managing editor Jamie Glazov.

If you're coming to Pedestrian Infidel from Front Page Magazine, welcome.  Have a look at a website that Muslims, in particular the Malaysian government, really do not want you to see -- this site has been blocked by the the Malaysian government since November 2010, possibly by the direct order of Prime Minister Najib himself.  (we're duly honoured of course).

Anyways, we hope you have the time to stay awhile and perhaps peruse our archives that go back to 2005.  We're sure you'll like what you find.

Tyranny and Totalitarianism on hold (for now) -- Malaysian Islamic Party maneuvers ahead of upcoming election

Malaysia's pious PAS party -- the party that wants shariah and an Islamic state in Malaysia -- has decided to put these demands on the proverbial back burner.

PAS eases up on Islamic state ahead of yet-to-be-called general election

KUALA LUMPUR: PAS is not harping on Islamic state anymore as it gears up for the 13th general election. ... PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang said it was not time yet to  implement an Islamic state.

Why the switch to taqiyya mode?  Well, it turns out that Malaysia is likely to have a general election in the next six to twelve months. So it's time to put the knives away, turn on the smiles and lie like there's no tomorrow.  I know all politicians lie to some extent, but Islamic theocrats, from PAS or anywhere else, take this dishonesty to a whole new level.  This is standard procedure for PAS in the run up to general elections.

Tell me, Mr. Abdul Hadi. Since shariah is such an enlightened legal system, according to you and its many other backers, and Islam is supposed to be the perfect way of life, then why would you say it's 'not yet time' for your theocratic state? Why downplay what are supposed to be your greatest strengths?

Also, in the Quran there was no mention about an Islamic state, but there was a mention of welfare state, he told a press conference ...

"Under the welfare state concept we have to be kind to all - humans, animals, and the environment. ... Some governments offer free healthcare and education. That should be the way.

Pure distilled taqiyya. Could someone point out the Quranic verses that state that non Muslims are to be treated as equals of Muslims?  And the use of 'welfare' as a buzzword is particularly disingenuous. Government-operated welfare systems the world over are facing bankruptcy. So the word 'welfare' probably means maintaining the Jizya system in Malaysia, where non Muslims are taxed at much higher rates than Muslims, with the resulting funds being ahnded over to Muslims. PAS confirms this extortionary system will continue when they're in charge:

PAS would also continue supporting the special privilege of the Malays [i.e Muslims] and the bumiputra, the bulk of whom were poor, he said.

[He added that] PAS would focus on propagating good governance according to the Islamic principles.

'Good governance', eh?  Well good luck with that. 'Good governance' is something that no Muslim-run party, government, or country has ever managed to accomplish. Muslim-run governments the world over are a veritable horror show of self-inflicted if not pathological self-destruction.

Hadi said PAS would continue garnering non-Muslim support ...

Well this should make it clear why PAS is backtracking from its position favoring shariah and a Islamic (i.e. totalitarian) state. After the elections are over, you can bet your bottom ringgit that they'll quickly resume their agitations for the implementation of complete and savage Shariah law.

Wednesday, June 01, 2011

Up at Jihad Watch: The 'Jekyll & Hyde' of Malaysian Muslims

Jihad Watch readers should now have a passing familiarity with the Malaysian government Islamic scholar, Jihadist, Shariah agitator, professional victim status claimer and Muslim apologist, one 'Doctor' Wan Azhar Wan Ahmad. In case you're not up to speed, 'Doctor' Azhar is the director of a government-backed Malaysian & Islamic 'think tank' (my apologies for using the term lightly) called the Centre for Syariah [Shariah], Law and Political Science, which is presumably charged with 'purifying the faith' and spreading (dis)information on Islam to whatever suckers are in earshot.

Read the rest at Jihad Watch