- Joined
- Jul 19, 2012
- Messages
- 14,185
- Reaction score
- 8,768
- Location
- Houston
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
Fed up with the endless blathering from officials about the attack in San Bernardino, Rudie Guliani exploded:
But if you talk to police you find out that they are not morons. They know what's going down. So why can't they call it radical Muslim terrorism?
Because the government denies that terrorism is due to Islamic doctrine. I've always said that a religion is what believers make of it. So for most Muslims the Quran isn't a call to kill non-believers. For those people Islam is in fact a religion of peace. But the fact of the matter is that a few Muslims are inspired to violence by Islamic doctrine. For them the call to kill non-believers is very literal. And that is Islam, too. A different sect, if you will. Muslims have names for them such as Salafist jihadis. They are a small minority even of fundamentalist Muslims, less than 0.5% of Muslims.
Mainstream authorities remind us that the Prophet (pbuh) spent the first half of his message making dawah (preaching, proselytizing), he did not start with jihad. Many imams have spoken out against the Salafist jihadis labeling their doctrines false and their practice of killing innocent people unlawful.
Some, such as the author of the article linked below, would argue that Obama and the government have dreamed up an Islam that doesn't exist, and Islam of their very own, an Islam that has nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism. Salafist jihadis are indeed inspired by Islamic doctrine of a sort, but they are a deviant splinter group, and so perhaps Hillary Clinton is right to insist that they be called Salafist jihadis or just jihadis rather than smearing the 99.5% of Muslims who are peaceful with the term "radical Muslim terrorism".
It isn't just the Obama administration that denies the Islamic nature of jihadis. Other Muslims, even other Salafists, do the same.
Read more at: San Bernardino Shooting -- Terrorist Act, Says Giuliani | National Review Online
But if you talk to police you find out that they are not morons. They know what's going down. So why can't they call it radical Muslim terrorism?
Because the government denies that terrorism is due to Islamic doctrine. I've always said that a religion is what believers make of it. So for most Muslims the Quran isn't a call to kill non-believers. For those people Islam is in fact a religion of peace. But the fact of the matter is that a few Muslims are inspired to violence by Islamic doctrine. For them the call to kill non-believers is very literal. And that is Islam, too. A different sect, if you will. Muslims have names for them such as Salafist jihadis. They are a small minority even of fundamentalist Muslims, less than 0.5% of Muslims.
Mainstream authorities remind us that the Prophet (pbuh) spent the first half of his message making dawah (preaching, proselytizing), he did not start with jihad. Many imams have spoken out against the Salafist jihadis labeling their doctrines false and their practice of killing innocent people unlawful.
Some, such as the author of the article linked below, would argue that Obama and the government have dreamed up an Islam that doesn't exist, and Islam of their very own, an Islam that has nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism. Salafist jihadis are indeed inspired by Islamic doctrine of a sort, but they are a deviant splinter group, and so perhaps Hillary Clinton is right to insist that they be called Salafist jihadis or just jihadis rather than smearing the 99.5% of Muslims who are peaceful with the term "radical Muslim terrorism".
It isn't just the Obama administration that denies the Islamic nature of jihadis. Other Muslims, even other Salafists, do the same.
Read more at: San Bernardino Shooting -- Terrorist Act, Says Giuliani | National Review Online