Islam and the Unspeakable Truth

Islam and the Unspeakable Truth, by Farhan Azad.

As an ex-Muslim, one intimately versed in the Koran and the mindset of so many who take literally its arrogant and intolerant admonitions, few things distress me more than seeing every latest massacre followed by the warm and fuzzy pieties of those in the West who find convenient not to understand.

The normalisation of the Western response to Islamic terrorism has arrive at such a state of cognitive dissonance and muddled morality that we expect and see automatic messages of solidarity after every latest terror attack — sympathy not for the victims but for Islam. Think #illridewithyou, for example.

As an ex-Muslim who fiercely advocated for the Religion of Peace while trying to absolve my beloved Islam of all responsibility, let me admit that I also hid behind this veil of obfuscation. …

The political correctness movement, which dominates and restricts “acceptable” Western public responses to terror, has produced a dangerous and delusional conflation: the belief that protecting Muslims and protecting Islam are inherently the same thing. …

Asserting the obvious, that only a relative few Muslims are prepared to visit terror and death upon unbelievers, tells us nothing of value. A more useful response would be “only idiots think all Muslims are terrorists, but it requires a much bigger idiot to believe there is no link between Islam and terrorism.”

The distinction between protecting people (Muslims) and protecting Islam (an ideology) must be made and addressed by politicians and commentators if there is to be any resistance to Islamism. Instead we see the coddling of Islam which plagues all discussion and dominates the West’s public stage. Rather than protecting Muslims this attitude serves only to shield Islamist doctrine from the scrutiny and response it deserves.

Islam is about global conquest:

The media, Muslims, apologists and politicians alike approach terrorism as some offshoot ideology, as if terrorists are spawned in a vacuum. I say this not to tarnish the image of the general Muslim community but to illustrate how the West scrambles to divorce terrorism from a religious motivation, the considerate goal being to ensuring Muslim feelings aren’t hurt. Rather than venturing to uncover the truth about Islamic teachings, the regressive left instead treats Islam as a cultural construct in which extremist elements can be eradicated by cradling and coddling.

The unrecognised truth — a truth those comfortable nostrums will not permit to be recognised — is that Islam does not subscribe to the same moral principles which shaped and govern Western civilisation and, therefore, is non-responsive to such an approach. Vital to bear in mind is that Islam differs fundamentally from most religions in that it does not call for the peaceful interaction of diverse and tolerant humanity; rather, it is a political ideology whose advocacy of “peace” translates as global domination. When the world submits, then peace will reign and not before.

A five-minute reading of the Koran should suffice to illustrate the Islam’s supremacist philosophy and ambitions, yet we are told to dismiss those violent, sexist, homophobic and anti-Semitic sentiments as misinterpretations. …

What can be done? Nothing. Islam is the most successful conquest meme ever, that cannot (or at least has not) ever been defeated in the world of ideas. It grows inexorably almost, with only minor setbacks.

What is the solution? Muslims must themselves reform their interpretation of their sacred texts, starting with the Koran’s justifications for violence and bigotry. This is particularly difficult, as Islam cleverly immunizes itself from any form of criticism and equates the slightest divergence with heresy, the penalty for which is death. Consequently, we are left with a robust ideology far more resistant to reform and critique than its Abrahamic cousin, Christianity.

The left is being incredibly hypocritical:

Further exacerbating this problem is the so-called “progressive” Left’s name-calling and its choking of dialogue. If the irony of that stance is recognised, apologists go to great lengths not to mention it, which is understandable: it would require a superhuman hypocrisy to howl down Islam’s critics as fascist peddlers of intolerance while simultaneously defending an ideology that is itself inherently totalitarian in nature.

Meanwhile, Islam’s ardent element deals brutally with criticism and dissent, as the spack-filled bullet holes in the walls of the Charlie Hebdo office in Paris attest. That massacre and others prompted celebration in Muslim communities across the world.


But, hey, the Muslim guy at work seems cool, so Islam can’t be that bad, right? This goes back to the issue of cognitive dissonance within the Muslim community. Liberal-minded and educated Muslims cherry-pick and isolate sections of the Koran which align with their democratic values, ignoring the divisive and hateful rhetoric. To the eyes of non-Muslims, the temptation to indulge in confirmation bias is irresistible. …

There is the blithe and presiding assumption that all humans are inherently good, and that all religions seek to eschew violence. Clearly, in the case of one problematic creed, this is is not the case.

Hence, I return to my point: Muslims do not deserve to be demonized, but Islamic doctrine must be analysed objectively and critiqued for what it is. Without political leaders taking the lead in this matter, terrorists and their enablers are have a free pass to continue waging jihad. No number of bouquets, toy bears, candles and renditions of Imagine will ever change that.

hat-tip Stephen Neil