What is a “Moderate” Muslim; Is there a “Moderate Islam?

· Islam
Authors

What is a “Moderate” Muslim; Is there a “Moderate Islam?

First, there is no such thing as “moderate Islam”.  That is a construct of western society – wishful thinking.  Such version of Islam is denied by the great majority of Islamic leaders in the world, and contradicted by Islamic scripture.  See THIS ARTICLE for further information on the myth of moderate Islam.
What is a “moderate Muslim”, really?  How “moderate” are they?
Our popular perception is shaped by our Judeo-Christian-centric western culture.  We consider all religions in the light of Judaism and Christianity, assuming that tolerance, forgiveness, and “ten commandment”-type mandates are common to all religions.  Consequently, we assume a lot.

For the most part we consider a Muslim to be “moderate” when he does not overtly condone, advocate, or participate in violent Jihadi acts.  In other words he is moderate when he acts “Christian.”  With this definition, a significant number of Muslims appear moderate.  However, the words “overtly”  and “appear” are important.

We also need to be aware that a certain percentage of Muslims are “nominal” Muslims, not fully knowledgable about their faith; not fully practicing their faith, like many “nominal Christians.”  It has been demonstrated that the more devout the Muslim becomes, the more he learns about the Islamic ideology, the more dedicated and committed he becomes to the teaching of the Qur’an, the Hadith, and demands of historical Islam.

The more devout may be labeled an “Islamist”:  One who believes and practices the historic teachings of the Islamic ideology.  And those teachings are certainly not “moderate” – at least not from the western Judeo-Christian perspective.  The term is used to distinguish an active or devout Muslims from an inactive or less devout Muslims, or from those who are perceived to be “moderate Muslims.”  However, there is a strong argument for considering all these various terms – Islamist, Islamism, Moderate Muslim – all pointless. [1]

Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan : “There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam and that’s it”

 During the autumn of 1843, in the heart of Istanbul, Turkey, Sir Henry Layard, the British archeologist, writer, and diplomat, witnessed the punishment mandated by the Shari’a, i.e., Islamic Law for apostasizing from Islam. He described this abhorrent spectacle as follows:

“An Armenian who had embraced Islamism [emphasis added] had returned to his former faith. For his apostasy he was condemned to death according to the Mohammedan [Islamic] law. His execution took place, accompanied by details of studied insult and indignity directed against Christianity and Europeans in general. The corpse was exposed in one of the most public and frequented places in Stamboul [Istanbul], and the head, which had been severed from the body, was placed upon it, covered by a European hat.”

 Layard’s narrative demonstrates how in mid-19th century parlance, “Islamism” and “Islam” were synonymous, and meant to be equivalent to “Catholicism,” “Protestantism,” and “Judaism”—not to “radical” or “fundamentalist” sects of any of these religions.  Moreover, through at least the mid-1950s, scholars devoted to the formal study of Islamic doctrine and history were still referred to as “Islamists.”

 Turkey’s current Prime Minister Erdogan, commenting in August, 2007 on the term “moderate Islam,” frequently used in the West to describe his ruling political party, the AKP, stated, “These descriptions are very ugly, it is offensive and an insult to our religion. There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam and that’s it.” Erdogan’s displeasure is ironic, even somewhat humorous, given the contemporary Western apologetic obsession to recast the terms “Islamism,” and “Islamist,” to denote, exclusively, “radical” or “immoderate” Islam, and its adherents. But the irony of Erdogan’s ire aside, artificial distinctions between “Islamism” and Islam, “Islamist” and Islamic are logically incoherent, obfuscating irrefragable truths about living Islamic dogma, and its modern manifestations.

 The 1990 Cairo Declaration, or “Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Islam”—not Islamism—was drafted and ratified by all the Muslim member nations of the Organization of the Islamic—not Islamist—Conference (OIC), a 57 state collective including every Islamic nation on earth. The OIC, currently headed by Turkey’s Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, thus represents the entire Muslim ummah (or global community), and is the largest single voting bloc in the United Nations.

 Its preamble and concluding articles (24 and 25) make plain that the OIC’s Cairo Declaration is designed to supersede Western conceptions of human rights as enunciated, for example, in the US Bill of Rights. The preamble repeats a Koranic injunction affirming Islamic supremacism, (Koran 3:110): “Reaffirming the civilizing and historical role of the Islamic Ummah which Allah made the best nation…” The gravely negative implications of this  Islamic Law (Shari’a)-based document (“There shall be no crime or punishment except as provided for in the Shari’a”) are most apparent in its transparent rejection of freedom of conscience in Article 10, while articles 19 and 22 reiterate Shari’a principles stated throughout the document, which clearly apply to the “punishment”—death—for so-called  “apostates” from Islam.

 The Cairo Declaration—entirely consistent with Islamic Law—also introduces unacceptable discrimination against non-Muslims and women, while sanctioning the legitimacy of dehumanizing, Shari’a-compliant punishments, from flogging, to mutilation, and stoning.

 And polling data from a rigorously conducted WorldPublicOpinion.org survey released April, 2007 demonstrate the Cairo Declaration’s Islamic Law principles—antithetical to Western formulations of human rights—are embraced by the preponderance of the world’s Muslims. Fully 2/3 of a representative sample of 4400 Muslims from Morocco, Egypt, Pakistan, and Indonesia desired the ultimate jihad conquest imperatives: to re-create a unified supra-national Islamic state, or Caliphate, ruled by “strict application of Shari’a.”

 These quintessential goals of jihad were reiterated by the mass murdering jihadist psychiatrist Nidal Hasan as part of an erstwhile “medical grand rounds” given on June 27, 2007. Although Hasan merely reiterates salient aspects of classical jihad theory (i.e., see slides 35, 39, 42, 43, 44, 45,  and 49), this reality is understandably “shocking” to our willfully uninformed elites in the media, military, and government. Nidal Hasan’s presentation concludes, in full accord with classical Islamic doctrine regarding jihad war, (slide 49), “Fighting to establish an Islamic State to please Allah, even by force is condoned by (sic) Islam.”

 Unapologetic observations from 1950 by a great 20th century “Islamist” scholar of the Shari’a, G.H. Bousquet, contextualize these ominous trends. Bousquet described Islam itself as “as a doubly totalitarian system,” which, “claimed to impose itself on the whole world and it claimed also, by the divinely appointed Muhammadan law…to regulate down to the smallest details the whole life of the Islamic community and of every individual believer.”


All Articles Copyright © 2007-2013 Dr. Andrew Bostom | All Rights Reserved
Printing is allowed for personal use only | Commercial usage(For Profit) is a copyright violation and written permission must be granted first. [2]

The True Islamist

The true Islamists are non-Muslims who advocate for Islam. The true Islamists are non-Muslims like Grover Norquist, Eric Holder, General Casey, Joe Sestak, Time magazine, the UN, et al …. non-Muslims and non-Muslim orgs that actively work to spread Islam. That is an Islamist. A muslim is a muslim. Period.

The use of the term Islamist is intellectually dishonest and misleading. Once again, attempting to obscure and confuse the multitude with deceptions manufactured for consumption of non-believers. The global jihad relies heavily on non-Muslims, aka Islamists, to further their nefarious goals.

Daniel Pipes and his wrongheaded ilk like to use the fallacious term Islamist for pious Muslims. There is no such thing. There are secular Muslims and practicing Muslims. As Andrew Bostom so brilliantly revealed in his piece Islamist or Islamic?:

Layard’s narrative demonstrates how in mid-19th century parlance, “Islamism” and “Islam” were synonymous, and meant to be equivalent to “Catholicism,” “Protestantism,” and “Judaism”—not to “radical” or “fundamentalist” sects of any of these religions. Moreover, through at least the mid-1950s, scholars devoted to the formal study of Islamic doctrine and history were still referred to as “Islamists.”

Turkey’s current Prime Minister Erdogan, commenting in August, 2007 on the term “moderate Islam,” frequently used in the West to describe his ruling political party, the AKP, stated,

“These descriptions are very ugly, it is offensive and an insult to our religion. There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam and that’s it.”

Erdogan’s displeasure is ironic, even somewhat humorous, given the contemporary Western apologetic obsession to recast the terms “Islamism,” and “Islamist,” to denote, exclusively, “radical” or “immoderate” Islam, and its adherents. But the irony of Erdogan’s ire aside, artificial distinctions between “Islamism” and Islam, “Islamist” and Islamic are logically incoherent, obfuscating irrefragable truths about living Islamic dogma, and its modern manifestations.

The 1990 Cairo Declaration, or “Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Islam”—not Islamism—was drafted and ratified by all the Muslim member nations of the Organization of the Islamic—not Islamist—Conference (OIC), a 57 state collective including every Islamic nation on earth. The OIC, currently headed by Turkey’s Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, thus represents the entire Muslim ummah (or global community), and is the largest single voting bloc in the United Nations.

And Robert Spencer weighed in on Turkey’s PM Erdogan, who insisted that the term “moderate Islam” was ugly and offensive — Islam is Islam:

And so in two sentences Erdogan dismisses the concept on which the Western world has placed its hopes of survival and peace.

Islam is Islam. Will this be discussed in the Western media? Will American and European analysts publicly take up the question of whether or not Erdogan is right, and what the implications might be if he is? Or will they ignore this and continue to assume in all their analyses that the opposite is true, and to dismiss as “ideologues” or “Islamophobes” those who point out that influential Muslims like Erdogan are saying things like this?

Which course do you think they’ll choose?

Will Western leaders then begin discussing political Islam and its implications openly? Or will they ignore this and continue to pretend that Islam has no inherent or traditional political character, or if it does, it is infinitely malleable anyway, and can be massaged without difficulty into something completely benign?

Which course do you think they’ll choose? [3]

It has been shown that a Muslim who participates in civic or government affairs, is a “good neighbor”, drinks with his buddies, or particpates in Western vices like porn and frequenting strip clubs is not necessarily a “moderate” Muslim.  That is not a reliable criteria.

Their Qur’an does in fact contain hundreds of verses that serve as the basis for their fascist tendencies, their supremacist self-image, their intolerance, and the basis for terrorist acts. HEREHERE and HEREHERE are the Qur’an’s and Hadith’s verses of violence.  Therefore, a moderate could be difined as a Muslim who specifically disbelieves, discounts, or ignores these signficant and widespread teachings throughout the Qur’an.  But how many Muslims have really done that?  How can we know?  We can’t.  It would be like trying to discern a “true Christian” by some test or assumption of an individual’s belief in certain passages of the Bible.
However, in modern times, there is no stigma in being known as a Christian (except among Muslims) whether you really believe most or all of the Bible or don’t.  Christians do not even approach Islams record of violence over the past several centuries.  On the other hand Muslims have a stigma of being known as being Islamic, whether they believe most or all of the Qur’an or not.  Islam leads the pack of world religions by a huge margin in the number of acts of violence.  Then, why would a truly “moderate” Muslim wish to remain associated with this type of ideology unless they truly believed in all of it?  Unfortunately, the concept of “moderate Muslim” becomes an oxymoron.
Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Prime Minister of the “moderate” Islamic nation of Turkey, said this:

“One cannot be a secularist and a Muslim at the same time.  The Muslim world is waiting for Turkish people to rise up.  The mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets, and the faithful our soldiers…this holy army guards my religion.”

 Regarding democracy, he said:  “You ride it until you arrive at your destination, then you step off.”

And finally:  “There is no “moderate” Islam.  Islam is Islam and that’s that.”

This leader of a “moderate” Muslim nation declares Islam must influence and control all facets of life.  Democracy is only a means to an end, the end being Islamic Sharia law. There is no moderate Islam.  There many be moderate Muslims, those who are less devout, less involved or more lukewarm.  In Islam, those “moderates” fall short of practicing “true Islam.”  However, for anyone studying the current Islamic phenomenon, it becomes more and more apparent that there may be many fewer “moderate” Muslims than we are led to believe.  [1]

Comments

Recep Tayyip Erdogan a devout Muslim and Prime Minister of Turkey, could not have said it any clearer, “There is no “moderate” Islam.  Islam is Islam and that’s that.” Anyone who wants to know what is expected of an orthodox  Muslim follow the 4 HERE’s and see what they tell you. It is an insult to a Muslim to imply that he is “moderate” and thus does not observe the Commands of Allah as prescribed in the Quran. I insinuates that he is only 1/2 a Muslim who picks and chooses what he wishes to follow. That is not a Muslim but an apostate.

What do we consider is a moderate Muslim? Someone who does not hate us, or want to kill us, or to wish us evil things, i.e., to be like a good Christian nuighbour who wants to live peacefully with us and a good neighbour, and sincerely. But can such a person still be considered a Muslim if he abandons the Quran or verses in the Quran that commands him the following:

(1) Quran 2:12 Kill disbelievers(of Allah) wherever you find them. If they attack you, then kill them. Such is the reward of disbelievers.

(2) Quran 4:8 Have no unbelieving friends. Kill the unbelievers wherever you find them.

(3) Quran 4:9 If the unbelievers do not offer you peace, kill them wherever you find them. Against such you are given clear warrant.

(4) Quran 5:7 Christians will be burned in the Fire.

(5) Quran 9:5 If you refuse to fight, Allah will afflict you with a painful doom.

(6) Quran 11:2 Those who oppose Islam and disbelieve in the Hereafter are guilty of the greatest wrong.

(7) Quran 18:3 The worst wrong is to forget Allah’s revelations.

(8) Quran 48:4 But if you’re willing to fight for Allah, he will provide you with lots of booty

(9) Quran 58:3 Don’t make friends with Allah’s enemies. For those who do so, Allah has prepared a dreadful doom.

(10) Quran  5:51 Sura 5:51: O you who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: they are but friends and protectors to each other. And he among you that turns to them for friendship is of them.” This friendship makes any Muslim a enemy of their own and deserving of the same fate as the unbeliever. This is because God does not guide an unjust people.

(It is not possible for a true Muslim to ever be a friend or neighbour of a non-Muslim as it is is a commandment of Allah.)

Those are just a few quotes from the Quran to show that it is impossible to be a Muslim and be moderate in their belief of Islam, because Islam is Islam and it is not moderate. If a Muslim does not believe in some of the verses in the Quran, he cannot possible be considered a Muslim by Islamic standards.

A Blog on a Moderate vs a Jihadist Muslim

(1) What does a “peaceful” Muslim believe in? He believes that there is only one god and he is Allah. He believes in the 6 Pillars of Islam. He believes that Muhammad was the last prophet of Allah. He believes that the Quran is the immutable word of Allah and all Muslims must accept Allah’s commands to the very T.
[Agreed? There are no tricks in it.]
(2) What does a “psychopathic Jihadist” Muslim believe in?
Believe it or not, he believes in exactly the same things as (1) above.
[No Difference.]
(3) But some Muslims decide to take an active role in Jihad, an obligatory command of Allah, others delay taking an active role in it, but both are under the SAME OBLIGATION TO ALLAH. There is absolutely no difference. So some decide to be Jihadists and others await a call from Allah to act. But both types are still Muslims reading the same Quran and worship the same Allah. Some decide to serve Allah like Jihadi John, others sit at home and pray for his success.
(4) But there are a class of people labelled, “cultural Muslim” or you might called them, “nominal Muslims,” like, “nominal Christians who go to church for weddings and funerals only.” These “cultural Muslims” look like the other Muslims, dress like them, live among them, celebrate the same festivities, eat the same food, go to the same restaurants, and even go to the same Mosques from time to time for occasions, and live happily next door to you. They may even smoke and drink and buffoon around, but they do not totally observe the same rules as (1) above. These are “cultural Muslim” the ones you identify as “peaceful Muslims.” Under pressure they could turn and become Jihadists but normally they live happily without accepting Allah’s commands. There are millions of such “cultural Muslims” in this world as there are millions of cultural Christians in this world. We must learn to differentiate these Muslims especially if there are Jihadists among our civilian population.
I hope this helps you to understand that the 1.3 billion Muslims in this world are not all Jihadists, but a great percentage of them are devout Muslims who will respond to the call of Jihad against the West.

A video of Muslim views of themselves and moderate Muslims:

Reference

[1] What is a Moderate Muslim: https://sites.google.com/site/islamicthreatsimplified/moderate-muslim

[2] Islamism of Islam: http://www.andrewbostom.org/blog/2009/11/12/islamism-or-islam%E2%80%94islamist-or-islamic/

[3] The True Islamist: http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2009/12/the-true-islamists.html

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: