The Official Blog Of Edward Cline

Viva la difference? Islam vs. “Radical” Islam?

On December 12th,
Judith Bergman, in her Gatestone column, “Europe:
Illegal to Criticize Islam
,” wrote:
In Finland, since
the court’s decision, citizens are now required to make a distinction, entirely
fictitious, between “Islam” and “radical Islam,” or else
they may find themselves prosecuted and fined for “slandering and
insulting adherents of the Islamic faith.”
I would like some state-appointed or free, independent Islamic scholar
— Western or not — to explain with a straight face to me and to the world,
the essential, fundamental differences between Islam and “radical
Islam” or “extremist” Islam. If Islam is not just a bizarre, death-worshipping
“religion,” but basically a collectivist ideology bent on total
submission of its adherents and of the world, moved by a gnawing appetite for total
and universal domination, what are the salient, distinguishing differences? How
would one explain the differences, say, between “ordinary” Communism and
“radical” Communism, or between  “ordinary” Nazism and a benign “moderate”
Nazism? 
You can’t list those distinguishing differences. They don’t exist. Islam
is a one-size-fits-all system, from your footwear to your hairstyle to your
diet.

Islam is “radical” because, as both a “religion” and as a political
ideology, it prescribes total submission of the individual – indeed, of society
– to the arbitrary and wholly irrational rules, permissions, prohibitions, and
punishments of its “creed,” otherwise known as Sharia Law. Just as Nazism and
Communism required the total submission of the individual to the state, Islam
requires the total submersion of the individual to the caliphate.

Islam is essentially, and readily admits, totalitarian – root branch,
and twig.
Bergman, writing about Terhi Kiemunki, a Finnish writer, was found
guilty of “slandering and insulting adherents of the Islamic faith,” and
noted that,
Finland is the
European country most recently to adopt the way that European authorities
sanction those who criticize Islam. According to the Finnish news outlet YLE, the Pirkanmaa
District Court found the Finns Party politician, Terhi Kiemunki, guilty of
“slandering and insulting adherents of the Islamic faith” in a blog
post of Uusi Suomi. In it, she claimed that all the terrorists in Europe
are Muslims. The Court found that when Kiemunki wrote of a “repressive,
intolerant and violent religion and culture,” she meant the Islamic faith.
During the trial,
Kiemunki was asked why she did not make a distinction between Islam and radical
Islam. She replied that she meant to refer to the spread of Islamic culture and
religion, and that she “probably should have” spoken of radicalized
elements of the religion instead of the faith as a whole. Kiemunki was fined
450 euros. Her lawyer has appealed the verdict.
That was Kiemunki’s
unfortunate omission. But, let us not forget late critic of Islam, OrianaFallaci. She excoriated Islam, setting fire to the whole tree. Srdja Trifkovic
in her Chronicles article of December 13, “Europe’s
Submission
,” wrote,.
The writing on
Europe’s wall was clear a decade ago, when the late Oriana Fallaci—for decades
Italy’s best-known journalist—was indicted in the Italian city of Bergamo for
“hate crimes” and “defaming Islam.” Fallaci, a self-described “Christian
atheist” and a leftist, in the aftermath of 9/11, had become an outspoken foe
of Europe’s Islamization. Her 2002 book The
Rage and the Pride
caused a sensation. It is not just the Western
culture and way of life that the jihadist hates, she wrote. Blinded as they are
by cultural myopia, the Westerners should understand that a war of religion was
in progress, a war that the enemy calls Jihad, which seeks the disappearance of
our freedom and our civilization
The late Oriana Fallaci

Quoting Fallaci,
Bergman writes that Islam wants to annihilate, she wrote,

“. . . our way of
living and dying, our way of praying or not praying, our way of eating and
drinking and dressing and entertaining and informing ourselves. You don’t
understand or don’t want to understand that if we don’t oppose them, if we
don’t defend ourselves, if we don’t fight, the Jihad will win . . . And with
that it will destroy our culture, our art, our science, our morals, our values,
our pleasures….”
A decade later, the
evidence that Fallaci’s grim forecast was correct is everywhere we look. In
France in 2013, Ivan
Rioufol
, a respected author and Le Figaro’s columnist for 30 years, faced criminal charges for insulting Islam. Renaud Camus,
one of France’s most prominent writers, was charged with “incitement to
racial hatred” in 2014, found guilty, and ordered to pay a 4000-euro fine for
warning of the danger of the “Great Replacement,” the colonization of France by
Muslim immigrants from the Middle East and North Africa, which threatens to
“mutate” the country and its culture permanently. In Germany, Lutz Bachmann,
the founder of the Pegida anti-Islamization movement, is currently on
trial. So is Marine Le Pen of the National Front in France. The list goes on.
In Finland, and
practically everywhere else, to fail to distinguish in public statements
between Islam and “radical” Islam is to be tarred with the brush of
“Islamophobia,” surely a pejorative, meaning having an “irrational” fear of
Islam. It is in wide use in every Western country and is used by the MSM to slander
anyone critical of Islam. But, anyone who knows a smidgen about the origin and
practice of Islam is justifiably and rationally fearful of Islam, especially Discover
the Networks
notes:

if
he is an “infidel.” Where did the term come from?

The term
“Islamophobia” was invented
and promoted in the early 1990s
by the International
Institute for Islamic Thought
(IIIT), a front group of the Muslim
Brotherhood
. Former IIIT member Abdur-Rahman Muhammad — who was with that
organization when the word was formally created, and who has since rejected
IIIT’s ideology — now reveals
the original intent behind the concept of Islamophobia: “This loathsome term is
nothing more than a thought-terminating cliche conceived in the bowels of
Muslim think tanks for the purpose of beating down critics.” In short, in its
very origins, “Islamophobia” was a term designed as
a weapon
to advance a totalitarian cause by stigmatizing critics and silencing
them.

This plan was an outgrowth of the Muslim Brotherhood’s “General
Strategic Goal for North America
,” by which the organization aimed to
wage “a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western
civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands
… so that … God’s religion [Islam] is made victorious over all other
religions.”  
“We have nothing to fear but Islam itself.”

Members of the
British press can be charged with “Islamophobia” or worse if a writer
identifies a terrorist or a criminal who has raped or murdered a Briton as a
Muslim (its current term is the euphemism“Asian”). Nevertheless, the European
Union has ordered the UK press to append blinders to its journalists (surely
not a precedent by now). Europe-Israël, in a column on November 18th, {“European
Union Orders British Press NOT to report when terrorists are Muslims
,” reported,

According the
European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) — part of the Council
of Europe — the British press is to blame for increasing hate speech and racist
violence. On October 4, 2016, the ECRI released a report dedicated only to Britain. The report said:
Some traditional
media, particularly tabloids… are responsible for most of the offensive,
discriminatory and provocative terminology. The Sun, for instance,
published an article in April 2015 entitled “Rescue boats? I’d use gunships to
stop migrants”, in which the columnist likened migrants to “cockroaches”…
ECRI is basing its
report on a recent study from Matthew Feldman, Professor at Teesside
University. This study compiled anti-Muslim incidents before and after
terrorist’s attacks.
A whirlpool of bowed zombies

Politically Correct
writing acts as a privately or government mandated “governor” on
thinking, stopping writers and modern reporters from committing the “sin” of
“Islamophobia” or “hate speech.”  Giulio
Meotti in his Gatestone column of December 6th, “The
West’s Politically Correct Dictatorship
,” elaborated:

Under this politically
correct dictatorship, Western culture has established two principles. First,
freedom of speech can be restricted any time someone claims that an opinion is
an “insult.” Second, there is a vicious double standard: minorities,
especially Muslims, can freely say whatever they want against Jews and
Christians….
There is no better
ally of Islamic extremism than this sanctimony of liberal censorship: both, in
fact, want to suppress any criticism of Islam, as well as any proud defense of
the Western Enlightenment or Judeo-Christian culture…..
Political
correctness is also having a huge impact on big business: Kellogg’s withdrew advertising from Breitbart for being
“not aligned with our values” and Lego dropped advertising with Daily Mail, to mention
just two recent cases.
The Indonesian Iterates

Politically
Correctness has no bounds, no demarcation lines. Everything is fair game to warp,
subvert, and destroy, from wedding cake bakers to Halloween costumes to national
security. To date, there have been no Muslim walkers of zombies on The
Walking Dead
. The producers of that TV series do not dare show any. But
then, most Muslims are already “walking dead.” Perhaps the producers sense
that. The irony is something to relish.


Au contraire, Mr. Obama. Islam
is eminently slander worthy.

Previous

The Grateful Dead of Dhimmitude

Next

George Soros: “The Spawn of Satan”

1 Comment

  1. Unknown

    Apostates from Islam have been executed for 1400 years in accord with the Koran and the words and actions of the Islamic prophet Mohammed and Islamic law, Sharia.

    Please support us:
    Indonesian Ex muslim Forum / Forum Murtadin Indonesia / http://www.mantanmuslim.com
    facebook.com/mantanmuslimcom/

Leave a Reply

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén