Enough of saying jihadists aren’t real Muslims
Our leaders keep trying to tell us that jihadists aren’t real Muslims. But the world’s Muslims aren’t holding their breath to hear what sort of Islamic legitimacy the West is about to confer on any given Islamist group. We need to stop dissembling and tell the truth about Islam
By constantly projecting Western standards on Islamic jihadis, CIA head John Brennan has come to epitomize the U.S. intelligence community’s intellectual failures concerning the true sources of the jihad. It’s a similar story all across the West.
Last Friday, March 13, Brennan insisted that Islamic State (IS) members are not Islamic. Instead:
“They are terrorists, they’re criminals. Most — many — of them are psychopathic thugs, murderers who use a religious concept and masquerade and mask themselves in that religious construct.”
Note his usage of terms familiar to Western people (“terrorists,” “criminals,” etc.). Islamic State jihadis may be all those things — including “psychopathic thugs” — from a Western paradigm, but the fact left out by Brennan is that, according to Islamic law and history, savage and psychopathic behavior is permissible, especially in the context of the jihad.
But perhaps Brennan knows all this and is simply being “strategic”? After all, the CIA head also, warned “against ascribing ‘Islamic legitimacy’ to the overseas terrorist group, saying that allowing them to identify themselves with Islam does a disservice to Muslims around the world.”
Brennan of course is following Barack Obama’s lead. A month earlier the president said:
“We must never accept the premise that they [Islamic State] put forward, because it is a lie, nor should we grant these terrorists the religious legitimacy that they seek. They are not religious leaders, they are terrorists. And we are not at war with Islam. We are at war with people who have perverted Islam.”
The problem is that, according to Western norms — built as they are atop Judeo-Christian principles — Islam has been “perverted” from day one. As far back as the 8th century, mere generations after Islam was born, Byzantine chronicler Theophanes wrote in his Chrongraphia:
“He [Islamic prophet Muhammad] taught those who gave ear to him that the one slaying the enemy — or being slain by the enemy — entered into paradise [e.g., Koran 9:111]. And he said paradise was carnal and sensual — orgies of eating, drinking, and women. Also, there was a river of wine … and the women were of another sort, and the duration of sex greatly prolonged and its pleasure long-enduring [e.g., Koran 56: 7-40, 78:31, 55:70-77]. And all sorts of other nonsense.”
More to the point, every atrocity IS has committed — beheading, crucifying, raping, enslaving, or burning people alive — is legitimate according to Islamic law and the teachings and deeds of Muhammad, that most “perfect” and “moral” man (Koran 33:21, 68:4), as documented here.
Based on Islamic historical texts, Muhammad sent assassins to slaughter his critics — including poets and one old woman whose body was dismembered by her Muslim assailants; he had an “infidel” tortured to death with fire in order to reveal his tribe’s hidden treasure; he “married” that same man’s wife hours later (the woman, Safiya, later confessed that “Of all men, I hated the prophet the most — for he killed my husband, my brother, and my father”); and he reportedly used to visit and have sex with his nine wives in a single hour.
(For more, read “The Perverse Sexual Habits of the Prophet”) Again, all this information is based on Islamic texts deemed reliable and regularly quoted by Muslim scholars and theologians — not fabrications by “Islamophobes.”
Even so, the point here is that, whatever the “truth” about Islam, its origins and founder, the premise that Brennan, Obama, etc., constantly put forth — that it would be counterproductive for “us” to confer any Islamic “legitimacy” on groups like the Islamic State — is fatuous at best.
As I explained in a 2009 article titled “Words Matter in the War on Terror”:
“Muslims are not waiting around for Americans or their government — that is, the misguided, the deluded, in a word, the infidel — to define Islam for them; much less will subtle word games and euphemisms emanating from the West manage to confer or take away Islamic legitimacy on the Islamists of the world.
“For Muslims, only Islamic law, the antithesis of international law, decides what is or is not legitimate, or in legal terminology, what is mubah or mahrum. Furthermore, the U.S. government would do well to worry less about which words appease Muslims … and worry more about providing its own citizenry with accurate and meaningful terminology.
FOR ENTIRE ARTICLE CLICK LINKClick here for the Top 12 Moments in Jewish History...LET THE ADVENTURE BEGIN! »