http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/the-muslim ... ent-586079Terry, Eilat - Israel
I think this is not quite accurate. Islam as an ideology is extremist. As Geert Wilders says, there may be moderate Muslims but no moderate Islam. To be a ”moderate” a Muslim must reject Islamic teaching, in whole or in part. What the ”radicals” are doing is promoting a revival of the original Islamic teachings, Jihad & the imposition of Shari’a by force, a return to the time of the Muslim conquests. Islam as an ideology cannot be reformed, the Islamic idea of reform is the opposite of moderate. Can someone be a ”moderate” Nazi?
I lived most of my life in an Arab country. Conceptually, the way to understand Islam is to define moderate as those who observe Islam as a folk religion, in other words, cultural Muslims who observe the holidays, marry & bury according to Islamic rites, keep Ramadan, Aid al-Kebir, eat the traditional foods for the holidays, who sort of live a Muslim life-style, maybe they pray once in a while, maybe they went to a madrassa as children & memorized a bit of the Qur’an – but, they can’t really understand the Arabic of the Qur’an, know little or nothing about ideology, have very little knowledge of Shari’a, are unaware of Muslim history, philosophy, or scholarly works – AND the ”bearers” of Islamic ideology, the Imams, the scholars, other religious leaders, some of the intellectual ”elites” – these are the fanatics of Islamic ideology, the pure & unadulterated extremist that Islam has always been.
You know, when I was young, say around 1970, things began to change. Up until that time, mosque attendance was way down, mostly a few old men. The influence of French culture, at least superficially, was everywhere. The urban population was small, the vast majority of the country was rural, poor, & illiterate. And, at this time, you could say that the whole country practiced ”folk Islam” – in other words, they were relatively moderate. Sure, they were anti-Semites, hated the West, raved & ranted about imperialism & colonialism, the usual Third-World Muslim BS.
But by 1975 or so, you could see the change – the country was ”importing” another Islam, an ideological Islam.
Islam was always political, there is no separation between mosque & state. The state’s legitimacy was based on it’s adherance to Islamic values & custom. But until the mid-1970’s, this was mostly a show, it wasn’t ”real” – and that began to change at a rapid rate, accelerating with the formation of Islamic movements & political parties.
Arab nationalism was discredited & more & more, Islam, the real Islam, the ideological Islam grew. This coincided with rapid urbanization & greatly increased education.
”Folk Islam” gave way to ideological Islam. It was like watching the nazification of Germany in the 1930’s.
And my point is that no one could fight this because it was in every way a return to the Islam of the prophet, the Islam of Mohammed the Jihadi warrior, the Islam of authentique Shari’a, the true Islam of expansion & conquest.
By the way, I read your post on why Israel should not attempt a preemptive military strike against the Iranian nuclear program. I think you are completely mistaken, you are just rationalizing inaction.
My own grandfather grew up in Lebanon- and were he alive today, his perception of the situation would probably be close to the commenter's post above.
It's not a demonization- it is a realization of what islam is - true to \"the prophet's\" words.
