(The Voiceover in the Video Detracts from the Power of the Original Raw Footage,
Which Has Been Removed By The People at Live Leak.)
"Perspectives on Terrorism" fancies themselves to be "Terrorism Analysts". What they are is Islam Apologists.
Or maybe christening them with the name Apologists is to give them too much credit.
Because what they really are is just liars.
Here's an article by them.
Here's a response from our friend The Last English Prince (in response to some friend of hers who, apparently is (doing the intellectually fashionable thing) trying to come to grips with the state of the world by blaming anyone but Muslims):
The authors are apologists for Islam. Throughout, statements like this: "Using these texts, trainers rely on twisted interpretations from the Holy Quran and from more or less well known Hadiths"
Again and again the authors speak of the "true Islam". The "true Islam" is brutal in application. I can accept some of the data, but I absolutely cannot accept the whitewashing of Islam under the guise of examining IS recruitment and training models.
The Yazidi female slaves are not an IS invention. They are a Muhammadan invention.
The fourth Caliph was recruited into Islam when he was a boy of about eleven years. The authors need not wring their hands over child recruitment. It has been going on since the seventh century. This is not new.
ISIS works hard to establish compliance, not Bi'dah - or innovation. The authors imagine that in understanding ISIS they understand how Islam has been twisted.
They have it backwards.
In understanding Islam, they will then understand ISIS.
The authors completely lack an understanding of Hadd penalties and why the man inside the gate, but outside the home was lashed. If they understood Hadd, they would understand that the lashing fell within rules of compliance based on how the text reads in the Arabic.
I am absolutely not interested in reading anything which seeks to distance Islam from practices which are in actuality sanctioned by Islam.
Pasto,
ReplyDeleteI have been discussing this issue today (related to the article) with a forensic psychiatrist.... and yes, he has a Muslim name. I commented to him,
"...perhaps the mistake being made in determining the script for Islam is the issue of invitation to masquerade parties..."
While the data is probably good, statements like those made in the article - a carte blanche "true Islam" apologetics... make me decline the invitation to the party. The process is corrupted.
I also noted the following to the psychiatrist:
"When you enter the wards each day you are invited to a masquerade party. Your job, is to delicately and slowly remove the mask. It must be done very carefully because embedded in that mask are issues of identity and the lies that each one of us tell ourselves about our lives, our destiny and our fate after death. There are no more powerful lies than the ones we weave regarding our destiny."
During the early years of Islam the focus was on social transactions and the Day of Judgment. During the latter years of Muhammad's life, the eschatological applications emerged. * The final sermon given by M. addressed an important Arabic concept which has play today in what is happening in al-Sham. Both of these issues (judgment and destiny) book-end the recruitment program for Islamic State. On the one hand, there is a looming day of requittal. On the other hand, end-of-days discussions, where epic battles will be fought, armed Jews killed, the Cross broken, the pig slayed and Dajjal (the Deceiver) assassinated find source in Hadith.
Hadith are the words, sayings and actions of Muhammad and this includes episodes of deliberate inaction - which make up the Sunnah - which is the granular application for Islamic jurisprudence.
We continue to do all - including Muslims - a disservice by deploying mixed-message analytical fare to deliver our product. Surely, we are far removed from the Condi Rice parroted script at this point in time, considering the level of threat.