Ignore The Apologists — ISIS Is Islamic
When it was first realized that the men that wrecked havoc on Paris Friday were probably Islamic extremists, the Muslims apologetics immediately began pouring in.
Nearly every major news outlet ran some variant of “Muslims Around The World Condemn Paris Atrocity.” The hashtag #MuslimsAreNotTerrorist became one of the top trending topics. Imams and other experts were found to declare the Islamic State is un-Islamic and Islam is all about peace and love.
To liberals who love multiculturalism, these statements are exactly what they want to believe. News outlets broadcast the message far and wide to let everyone know that the attack had nothing to do with Islam.
In addition to the message that ISIS is totally not a Muslim thing, there’s also the spin that people of the Islamic faith could (emphasis on could) become the victims of a hateful backlash. We’ve heard reports of Paris mourners worrying about the attack fueling “Islamophobia.” A feminist writer tweeted about how awful it was for her niece to wonder if the little one had to now hide her Islamic faith. And a popular Facebook post shared the story of a non-Muslim coming to the aid of a Muslim who was getting verbally harassed for the Paris carnage by two conveniently placed Donald Trump supporters.
The message is clear: Islam has nothing to do with the attack, and casting any kind of blame on the faith puts Muslims at risk of retaliation. (RELATED: ‘Open Hearts’ Let The Terrorists Strike Again)
Except, there is a form of Islam that does have a responsibility for the attacks and it does have a basis in the Koran. Granted, the vast majority of Muslims don’t subscribe to this radicalized version of the religion, but more and more young men are embracing it. And they’re killing in the name of it.
Anyone who might believe in the liberal line that ISIS is un-Islamic should read The Atlantic’s February cover story “What ISIS Really Wants.” It easily dispenses with the notion that the terror group has nothing to do with the tenets of the faith. One expert quoted in the piece, Princeton academic Bernard Haykel, says that the Muslims who peddle the comfortable lie are “embarrassed and politically correct, with a cotton-candy view of their own religion.”
According to Haykel, the refusal to acknowledge ISIS’s religious nature has more to do with “interfaith-Christian-nonsense tradition” than Islamic theology.
The Atlantic piece thoroughly documents what passages of the Koran and Islamic traditions ISIS bases itself on, such as execution by beheading and placing special taxes on Christians. Even the group’s use of slavery is supported with texts from the Koran. It’s worth noting that the leader of ISIS, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, even has an actual Ph.D in Islamic theology as well.
A reader will not conclude from the essay that ISIS has no connection with “real” Islam.
As previously mentioned, it’s also a subset of Islam that thousands of Muslims — many of them living in the West — are starting to sympathize with. For example, in France, it was found that one out of six Muslims living in the country support ISIS, with 27 percent of young adults having a favorable view of the militants.
There’s also over 1000 French nationals actually fighting for ISIS, and the group has been able to recruit thousands more from the United Kingdom, Belgium, Spain and even the United States.
And that’s just the ISIS-specific form of radical Islam. There are many more Islamic fundamentalists living in western countries who condemn terrorism that targets innocent civilians, but wish to see sharia law replace their nation’s constitutional law.
In the U.K., 40 percent of its Muslim residents want sharia law implemented in Britain.
It is true that most Muslims would fall in the moderate category. But when Islam has a large number of extremists who cause destruction throughout the world — and at a rate far higher than any other religion — it’s time for Muslim leaders to come to grips with their radical problem.
There is no Christian ISIS. There is no comparable Christian organization to the Muslim Brotherhood. There’s not even a Christian theocracy.
Radical Islam is a problem unique to the faith it originates from, and pretending it’s not is sheer delusion. But liberals would prefer to side with President Obama on the matter and continue to believe this problem has no ties to the religion. (RELATED: How Can ISIS Ever Withstand Obama’s ‘Better Ideas’?)
The apologists are perfectly fine with this arrangement as well. They like to throw the blame for radicalism (or should we call it “non-Muslim extremism”?) entirely on Islamophobia and western foreign policy — taking any responsibility for the hardliners away from Muslim leaders. These apologists seem more concerned with any criticism of their religion — justifiable or unjustifiable — than with the maniacs who commit murder.
But what’s happening in their communities is very much their problem. Why is their moderate message failing to connect with the young men who’ve journeyed to the new caliphate? Why do so many of these devout young adults want sharia? How do so many of these terrorists find safe haven in Muslim majority neighborhoods?
If Muslim leaders want to calm fears of Islam, they must do much more to combat radicalism in their communities instead of giving the same rehashed sermon about the religion of peace.