By WILLIAM MAYER
February 5, 2017 - San Francisco, CA - PipeLineNews.org - A Muslim “reformer,” Raheel Raza, who was born in Pakistan [author of Their Jihad, Not My Jihad: A Muslim Canadian Woman Speaks Out ] is in the news [Abigail R. Esman, Raheel Raza Hopes To Be The Muslim Extremists Hate Most , Investigative Project on Terrorism] promoting what can only be described as the Holy Grail among a fairly large segment of generally conservative minded national security intellectuals who believe that the global Islamic jihad can be defeated by a wholesale reinterpretation of the core of Islamic dogma - a Reformation of sorts.
This feature piece finds Ms. Raza promoting an initiative she calls Muslims Facing Tomorrow, through which she hopes to “reclaim” Islam and fashion it into an ideology that is compatible with Western values, a tall order.
On Raza’s website she speaks of cultural and religious diversity in the same manner as does the progressive/Marxist left, as somehow being the pinnacle expression of a fair and ethical society, which when actually defined means that integration in the West must be a two way street – that we have no intrinsic right to our culture.
Raza’s lead board member, Salim Mansur in an essay entitled Islam and Islamism [Gatestone Institute], explains his understanding of the distinction between Islam and Islamism which casts those who believe that there is no difference between Islam and Islamism as bigots.
In it he states:
“If Islamism is Islam, as some in the West insist, then it logically follows that the West is at odds with all Muslims without there being any need to make distinctions among them, and Islam itself is the threat to the West as a civilization…”
We must assume that this type of thinking is also representative of Raza’s, and in reading through her IPT article, which features an interview, we find nothing to indicate otherwise.
Having thoughtfully considered this topic for a very long time and until recently refusing to make a judgment about Islam that is essentially ideological - Muslims I am sure would insist on using the term theological - over the last few years we have come to the firm conclusion that as Salim writes [though obviously absent his politicized apologetics] “Islam itself is the threat to the West as a civilization.”
First let us deal with Ms. Raza’s high regard for diversity.
In our opinion this is simply left-speak for the argument that all cultures are equal in a moral/ethical sense, an opinion which is odious and provably fraudulent.
Question: If this were really true, then why isn’t Ms. Raza [including Mr. Salim and their kindred spirits] making these same proclamations from Muslim majority nations?
The answer is that she and her very small band of supporters value their heads too much to try such a stunt, because freedom of speech, religion, gender equality, tolerance and the rest of the franchise we call modernity can be found in only one place on the globe, the West - Europe and the United States.
Additionally there is the issue of Western Civilization itself which we have no trouble proclaiming as being exceptional and superior in the universal sense. Regardless, it is OUR right as citizens to define it and decide its nature. No one should have the expectation of coming to the West only to immediately set about remodeling its ethical and religious foundations.
It may sound brutal to some but immigrants are here at OUR sufferance. If they wish to fully acculturate, learn the language [English being the standard of the business world], respect its norms and customs and not peddle the type of bilge which really empowers jihadism by suggesting that there is some alternative form of Islam that is "peaceful" but has yet to reveal itself, great, welcome…if not, well we hear that the weather in Riyadh is nice this time of year.
To put it a little more bluntly, frankly we are tired of being lectured to by people who lack sufficient grasp of the issues involved and/or play hide and seek with reality to have an opinion worthy of consideration.
We have no reason to doubt the sincerity of Raza, Salim and certain other “reform” minded Muslims but their argument is simply a non-starter and inherently dangerous as noted above.
The world is what it is, governed by cause, effect and empiricism, so if such a tolerant iteration of Islam is possible why is there no evidence that it exists anywhere on the planet? For that matter where is the historical evidence that such a “moderate” Islam ever existed?
So at best the reformer argument is really an hypothesis in search of proof, of which there really can be none, meaning it’s really gibberish being perpetrated by people who are unwilling to judge their religion by Western standards, which is of course, as citizens of the West their right…even if they are wrong, which they are.
If one needs an example of the intrinsic intolerance of Islam one need only read the concluding lines of Sura 1 from the Qur’an, Al-Fatihah, The Opening:
“…guide us the straight way - the way of those upon whom Thou hast bestowed the blessings, not of those who have been condemned [by Thee], nor of those who go astray.” [source, The Message of the Quran, as translated by Muhammad Asad]
Historically, going back many hundreds of years, learned imams have without deviation defined “those who have been condemned [by Thee]” as being the Jews and “those who go astray” as referring to Christians.
How can a faith tradition who in it’s very first verse relegates all non believers to the tortures of Shaitan [the Devil] ever be reformulated into a philosophy that is compatible with a “diverse” culture?
Sadly, this kerfuffle is a smokescreen designed to protect people who know perfectly well that Islam and the West have not ever nor are they ever likely to be able to coexist, but for various reasons cannot bring themselves to confront the truth.
If one chooses to hunt unicorns, fine, just don’t insult my intelligence by expecting me to agree that such an evanescent pursuit, is reasonable or worthwhile.
©2017 PipeLineNews.org LLC, William Mayer. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the editor, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other noncommercial uses permitted by copyright law.