Moderate Islam Is No Islam
16 Jul, 2007
- We humans are torn each day by conflict, sometimes in our profession, other times in our family, sometimes in our country and in the world at large. Humans are unique. We are driven to search for meaning of things. We want to make sense out of things and find a purpose to continue.
I believe that there is an unfathomable Being who is the Fashioner of this universe, including us. We refer to this Being as God, He, and so forth, in a futile attempt to encapsulate this Being into our extremely finite minds.
I also believe that this Being is not a dot commer. He doesn't sit around and wait to fill orders or requests. Neither does he interfere in the details of our lives. What he has done and does, to my understanding, is to establish certain rules and parameters that give each one of us a tremendous leeway on how to play the game of life.
Each one of us, according to these rules and parameters, receives a "hand" for playing the game. It really doesn't matter what kind of hand we start with, it matters how well we play the hand we are dealt. Do we enlist ourselves in the service of good and combat evil, or do we just squander away our time?
I believe that prayers are primarily for giving us comfort, for calming us down, for helping us take the steps needed to mend our ways, to do all we can to be worthy humans. Also to clear our hearts and heads from the dross of daily worldly entanglement, to help put matters in proper perspective, to live at peace with both our gifts as well as our limitations, to aid us in entertaining good thoughts, uttering good speech and doing good deeds.
When prayers are said with the above mindset, they are already answered prayers. Death is inevitable. It is the journey that invariably follows birth, sooner or later. Let us hope that we all do justice to our gift of humanness in this life and wing to the next with minimal sense of shame and shortcoming.
I believe we all have a purpose in life. We all are here for a reason and we can't leave before our time is up. We have to put in the time. Putting in the time is the right of passage, right? They asked Abdu'l-Baha about the idea of committing suicide or wanting to hasten one's death, since the writings praise the next life so much that some want to get on with it and get there. He said that the next life is immensely glorious. But, committing suicide and going there is like going to a magnificent banquet uninvited. I like the metaphor. Right now, we are here and must do what we must and put up with whatever comes our way, both good and not so good. So let us stay put and keep on earning the ticket.
Many people have asked me why I have put my life in harm’s way by tangling with Islam and why I do what I do. Born in a Muslim family and having witnessed first-hand the horrors and indignity that Islamofascism visits on people it subjugates, I have taken it upon myself to do my part in defeating this ideology of oppression, hate and violence. Islam is wrapped in deception as a spiritual dogma or religion and is more dangerous than Nazism, Communism and Fascism.
My writings aim to help people decide if they want to rank with the Islamists or do they want to truly live as free men. The truth shall set you free, it is said, but first it will shatter the cozy, sweet world you live in.
Nowadays we hear from the non-Muslim world about the moderate version of Islam and moderate Muslims. In my view, being a Muslim and not being radical is simply not possible. I never thought that it would be easy to reason with Muslims. They don't understand that freedom has a price. Freedom lets a person make choices and be up-front about it. And that's where I part with those who would prefer to be sheep and have sheepdogs hem them in.
Many non-Muslims are obviously very well-meaning with regard to Islam, but they are also extremely naïve and ignorant of the facts. They seem to think that Islam is just another religion of love and peace and Muslims should be given full freedom to practice their religion. Do they also believe that thieves, misogynists, rapists, child-molesters and any and all manner of practicing evils should be given complete carte blanche to carry on with what they value and believe? These well-meaning simpletons are just as deluded as the fanatic jihadists by refusing to acknowledge the fact that one cannot be a Muslim and not abide by the dictates of the Quran.
There is no such thing as moderate Islam. There is no such thing as secular Islam or a secular Muslim. How can you possibly secularize a shark or a snake? You can’t. It’s the nature of the beast. There are numerous sects within Islam. One and all are extremes and not in the least amenable to change. Keep in mind that Islam claims that it is the perfect eternal faith for mankind. Splits have occurred and will continue to occur in Islam. Yet, reformation has not happened in nearly 1400 years and is not going to happen. Islam is carved in granite, just the way it is. No change. Allah's book is sealed.
There are indeed some Muslims who are moderate in the way they practice their religion. These people, for the most part, are culturally Muslims. They don't practice Islam the way it is mandated. They pick and choose. Therefore, "moderate Islam," is no Islam at all. It is not possible. The only way to deal with the menace of real Islam, the Islamofascist varieties, is to fully dismantle it and relegate it to the confines of museums.
The Islamists have created fear not only in a non-Islamic world, but in the hearts and minds of those who consider themselves to be Muslims. The Islamists wage their war under the name of Islam. They receive immense direct and indirect support from the rank-and-file of ordinary Muslims. It is this support of moderate Muslims that keeps the Islamists alive. And it is the Islamists who are intent on showing no mercy to any and all who do not share their ideology, be they Muslims or not.
This is why there is truly no such thing as a “moderate” Muslim. Moderate Muslims, or in other words “non-practicing Muslims”, are moderate by default only. Like millions of Iranians who were born into a faith they did not choose, a faith that was “inflicted” upon them by invaders of a foreign culture, a faith that forbids them to leave or revert to their pre-Islamic heritage and other Iranian religions, they remain Muslims in name only.
However, someone like the fanatic Ahmadinejad is a true Muslim who was instilled from his upbringing with Islamic superstitions, prejudices and hatreds. He was indoctrinated, from the moment of his birth, by an extensive ruthless in-power cadre of self-serving mullahs and imams who intended to maintain their stranglehold on the rank and file of the faithful—their very source of support and livelihood.
The fanatic Ahmadinejad is every bit as bloodthirsty as Hitler. Every jihadist is. But, he is not a Hitler. Not yet. He is far from having control of the Iranian State, including its armed forces. Even his popularity among the very poor is sinking for not being able to deliver what he had promised. Hence, the thing to do is to increase greatly any and all non-violent pressures on the present Islamic regime in Iran. Despite the current tug-o-war in Washington, we hope to believe people in U.S. government have studied all the possible effective actions and now it is time to put them into full effect without any delay. It is also time for the rabid self-serving Bush-bashers to start fighting the real enemy.
The majority of Iranians are against the mullahs' rule and many are staunchly pro-West and pro-America. However, a minority supports the mullahs for a variety of reasons, such as jobs, influence and simply for money. And a much smaller minority composed of the people we call the 3Fs -- fools, fanatics and frauds, do support the Mullahs. Further, the mullahs have severely dis-empowered the opposition by systematic harassing, jailing and killing.
The mullahs’ days are, however, numbered and we will witness the rule of the true Iranians, the majority of whom are worthy human beings. No totalitarian rule can survive without a segment of the population, for one reason or another, supporting it. Yet, time is not on the side of the mullahs. By their mismanagement, thievery and oppression of the masses, they have created explosive internal conditions. Any significant support of the presently splintered Iranian opposition will be the tipping point—a tipping point that would assuredly topple the mullahs.
In conclusion, our best hope for humanity and civilization to survive is to firmly resist Islamofascism in all its forms. As an Iranian-American, I have experienced first-hand the Islamic tyranny as well as the blessings of liberty. I find it my solemn duty to do all I can to battle Islamofascism, the most dehumanizing active threat of our time.
| If you like this essay: |
Stumble it
 |
digg it |
Amil Imani is an Iranian born, pro-democracy activist who resides in the United States of America. He is a poet, writer, literary translator, novelist and an essayist who has been writing and speaking out for the struggling people of his native land, Iran. Amil Imani's Home Page: www.amilimani.com.
Name: Love for Iran
Date: Monday July 16, 2007
Time: 00:38:53 -0700
Comment
Iran is nice county with very nice people. Handful of those Iranian who fled after the Islamic revolution want regime change, similarly to those Iraqis who lived in exile and lied about Iraq possessing illegal weapons. Maybe time is on the side of the country that sings of democracy and yet launches illegal war, kill thousand of people. At the end they realize they under estimate their enemy. The war fate has already been determined. That is why they can not launch new wars, they have been crippled.
Name: No 2 Democracy
Date: Monday July 16, 2007
Time: 00:42:53 -0700
Comment
I don't care about democracy. I just want to get rid of Islam, period. Saddam Hussein was righteous in comparison to Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
Name: In Your Face amil imani
Date: Monday July 16, 2007
Time: 02:38:58 -0700
Comment
Keen observers of Iran have insisted for years that the Iranian people are pro-Western, indeed pro-American, while opposed to the largely unelected clerical regime that rules them. For the first time, Terror Free Tomorrow's unprecedented nationwide poll of Iran offers indisputable empirical proof that these commentators are dead-on in their assessment of the "Iranian street." Discontent with the current system of government, the economy and isolation from the West is widespread throughout Iran. In this context, nuclear weapons are the lowest priority for the Iranian people. The overwhelming popular will to live in a country open to the West and the U.S., with greater economic opportunity, is a powerful plea from every region and segment of society. Iranians also speak with one voice in rejecting the current autocratic rule of their supreme leader and in courageously asking for democracy instead. Iranian students: A new survey shows their fellow citizens want democracy too. These are among the significant findings of the first uncensored public opinion survey of Iran since President Ahmadinejad took office. The survey was conducted in Farsi by telephone from June 5 to June 18, 2007, with 1,000 interviews covering all 30 provinces of Iran (and a margin of error of 3.1%). The last poll to ask similar controversial questions was conducted in September 2003 by Abbas Abdi inside Iran. He was imprisoned as a result. Developing nuclear weapons was seen as a very important priority by only 29% of Iranians. By contrast, 88% of Iranians considered improving the Iranian economy a very important priority. 80% of Iranians favor Iran offering full international nuclear inspections and a guarantee not to develop or possess nuclear weapons in return for outside aid. Moreover, close to 70% of Iranians also favor normal relations and trade with the U.S. Indeed, in exchange for normal relations, a majority of Iranians even favor recognizing Israel and Palestine as independent states, ending Iranian support for any armed groups inside Iraq, and giving full transparency by Iran to the U.S. to ensure there are no Iranian endeavors to develop nuclear weapons. Yet the most significant finding of our survey for the future of Iran's present rulers is the opposition to their current system of government. Some 61% of Iranians were willing to tell our pollsters -- over the phone no less -- that they oppose the current Iranian system of government, in which the supreme leader rules according to religious principles and cannot be chosen or replaced by direct vote of the people. More telling, over 79% of Iranians support a democratic system instead, in which the supreme leader, along with all leaders, can be chosen and replaced by a free and direct vote of the people. Only 11% of Iranians said they would strongly oppose having a political system in which all of their leaders, including the supreme leader, are chosen by popular election. Iranians across all demographic groups oppose the unelected rule of the supreme leader in favor of electing all their leaders. While these views run stronger in Tehran, they are also held across all provinces of Iran, and in both urban and rural areas. Terror Free Tomorrow's path-breaking survey of Iran demonstrates that the Iranian people are the best ally of the U.S. and the West against the government in Tehran. The considerable challenge is how to support the Iranian people while also achieving important U.S. goals, such as preventing the Iranian government from developing a nuclear arsenal. There are no easy answers. The U.S., with France, Germany, Britain and the international community, however, should not spurn the clear will of Iranians. The implicit bet Iranians seem to want the world to make is to engage Iran now, and place the burden squarely on Iran's rulers to reject an offer that would clearly improve the life of the Iranian people themselves. This does not mean that the U.S., Europe and the international community should abandon current sanctions or indeed fail to strengthen future sanctions against the regime. Yet since military options for responding to Iran entail even greater unknowable risks, and sanctions alone so far have proved inadequate, a strategy that also recognizes the consensus of the people of Iran themselves may realistically offer the best hope for all. Mr. Ballen is president of Terror Free Tomorrow
Name: In Your Face amil imani
Date: Monday July 16, 2007
Time: 02:41:34 -0700
Comment
U.S. Sens. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) and Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) announced their support Wednesday for Democratic legislation requiring a strict timetable for troop reductions in Iraq. Snowe called the current strategy "unacceptable." Congressional dissatisfaction with the Iraq war is hardly a new theme, but events in the past 72 hours have signaled a major shift in the power politics of Washington. George W. Bush's presidency obviously has not been a smooth ride. The Democrats clearly were never all that taken with him in the first place. The country's independents also have not supported the president for some time. For this group, Bush's perceived unawareness of the severity of the Hurricane Katrina aftermath was the killing blow from which their confidence in the White House has never recovered. But while a president prefers to rule with the support of the country's independents, it is not a requirement. So long as his own party holds, even an unpopular president can do many things. Bush's problem is that Republican loyalty now appears broken as well. The party comprises three factions: business interests, social conservatives and national security conservatives. Keeping business interests happy is normally simple for a Republican leader, but on Bush's watch, the presidential veto has not yet been used to limit spending. Consequently, the budget deficit has ballooned, and business Republicans' loyalty is no longer a given. Social conservatives feel equally betrayed. Even this is manageable. On most policies -- especially foreign policy issues such as Iraq -- the only thing a president needs is to make sure his opponents cannot override his vetoes. The U.S. Constitution is extraordinarily clear that the executive branch executes state policy. So long as Congress cannot impose policy prescriptions over the presidential veto, the president remains firmly in control. This is why this week's events are so critical. The seemingly never-ending nature of the war and the White House's my-way-or-the-highway policies appear to have broken the normally unbreakable portion of the Republican coalition -- national security conservatives. Of the 49 Republican senators, by Stratfor's count, five long ago left the president's camp on the issue of Iraq, and nine more have left within the past month -- seven of them this week alone. These are not dilettantes. Sens. Snowe, Hagel, John Sununu and Richard Lugar are part and parcel of the current generation's core U.S. defense thinkers. No president can simply ignore it when people like these run up the red flag. While there obviously is a difference between disenchantment with Iraq policy and an all-out rebellion against presidential authority, Democrats and disaffected Republicans now hold 64 votes in the Senate -- tantalizingly close to the 67-seat, veto-proof, across-the-aisle coalition needed to bypass the president. (This 64-seat majority does not include erstwhile Democrat Sen. Joseph Lieberman.) The momentum is certainly against Bush, and -- barring a very impressive rabbit-from-the-hat trick -- domestic opinion about Iraq will be impossible to turn around. In the meantime, the Iraqi government is clearly not on the verge of acting like a functional ruling body. And those opposed to a U.S.-Iranian deal -- especially foreign jihadists and other groups inside Iraq -- are sparing no effort to turn the region into a bloodbath. The bitter irony, as far as Bush is concerned, is that the ultimate rabbit -- a comprehensive deal with Iran over the future of Iraq that ends the war in as conclusive a manner as possible -- could actually end the Bush presidency as well and push that 64 up to 67. Any initial U.S.-Iranian deal will require reining in rogue elements. Hence, even if things from this point on go swimmingly, the violence is certain to get worse before it gets better. Iran and the United States have been going back and forth for years over a potential Iraq settlement. At every turn, each has tested the other's nerve and attempted to appear tougher than it actually is. The Iranians know that if they do not seal a deal soon, they might have to start from scratch, not only with a new U.S. administration but also with an administration intent on using national security issues to prove itself worthy of the public's trust. If Iran cannot get a deal soon, it might not get one at all -- and that sets the stage for possible Iranian concessions due to American weaknesses
Name: Jonathon
Date: Monday July 16, 2007
Time: 12:16:51 -0700
Comment
"It is also time for the rabid self-serving Bush-bashers to start fighting the real enemy." You're kidding me, right? Has anyone in the United States done more to aid and assist "the real enemy" than one George W. Bush? Who has provided more support, more sympathy for Al Qaeda than George W. Bush? Who gave Osama bin Laden EXACTLY what he wanted (i.e., a Western power occupying a Muslim nation) when the United States invaded Iraq, against the wishes of the majority of the American people and of the member states in the UN? Who let Osama and his henchmen escape from Afghanistan into the tribal areas of Pakistan? Who pulled our troops back in Tora Bora? Who took his eye off the ball in Afghanistan and moved our troops, resources and the attention of our media from the real fight against Al Qaeda to the imaginary fight against Saddam Hussein's non-existent "weapons of mass destruction"? Do not be fooled by the propaganda and rhetoric from the Republican Party and their neoconservative cheerleaders in the media. NO ONE HAS DONE MORE TO HELP AL QAEDA THAN GEORGE W. BUSH. Those of us who rightly fight against the damage this man and his party have done to our nation and to this world do not deserve to have our efforts and viewpoints dismissed as "rabid" and "self-serving". The United States is dedicated to winning the war against Islamic terrorism. We are hardfast in our opposition to Islamism and faith-based terror. We want to rid the world of people like Osama and his henchmen. But we can't do it while bogged down in a war of choice that had nothing to do with the problem of Al Qaeda. Bush has magnified the problem and will leave office in 2008 having weakened our military, weakened our international relations and by having strenghtened the very people who want to destroy us. Ridding ourselves of George W. Bush is the best thing that the United States can do at this point, to halt any further damage to ourselves. Bush's approach to terrorism is a big part of the problem, and no amount of bombs dropped on Tehran is going to change that. Besides, attacking Iran will do more to strengthen the clerics' rule instead of weakening it. Just look at how we all rallied around Bush right after 9/11! Before that day, most of the country thought he was a joke and his appointment to the presidency by the Supreme Court was an aberration and would be short-lived. Had Al Qaeda not attacked us in 2001, Bush would never have been "re-elected" in 2004 and we'd not have wasted over 3000 American lives and BILLIONS of dollars destroying the infrastructure and lives of the Iraqi people.
Name: Death to Islam
Date: Monday July 16, 2007
Time: 13:56:45 -0700
Comment
You want to know what Islam means? It means sticking a rod in people's rear ends and saying hee-haw. It is about urinating on civil liberties. http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSBLA66590320070716
Name: Bill Morgan
Date: Monday July 16, 2007
Time: 19:44:26 -0700
Comment
Great web site.
Name: Godot
Date: Tuesday July 17, 2007
Time: 12:22:24 -0700
Comment
Moderate Islam is an oxymoron disseminated by "proxy" morons and broadly speaking moderate rligion, any and all religions, should be considered similarly.
Name: Jack
Date: Saturday July 21, 2007
Time: 05:13:24 -0700
Comment
Like many well meaning non=Muslims, I'd like to believe there is a chance for "moderate" Islam. But after reading the Koran and other Muslim works, I can't escape the conclusion that there can never be such thing as "moderate" Islam. There are only moderate Muslims who, as the author says, don't practice their religion as it is handed down to them in their "holy" book. By its express terms, Islam requires its adherents to be bigots and advocates violence against infidels. There are more than 30 verses in the Koran that order the faithful to make war on the unbelievers. You cannot interpret them away and have something left that is Islam. We are all in terrible danger from this ideology.
Name: moderate Islam is like moderate Nazism
Date: Friday July 27, 2007
Time: 18:30:55 -0700
Comment
Muslims who abhor violence, who do not use their wealth or bodily strength to fight for Allah's cause are BAD Muslims. Or as the Qur'an puts it, "hypocrites": [Qur'an 48:11 "The desert Arabs who lagged behind [in fighting] will say to you (Muhammad): ‘We were engaged in (looking after) our flocks and our families.' We have prepared for them a Blazing Fire!][Qur'an 9:67 "The Hypocrites enjoin what is forbidden, and forbid what Islam commands. They withhold their hands (from spending in Allah's Cause [Jihad]). They have forgotten Allah so He has forgotten them. Verily the Hypocrites are oblivious, rebellious and perverse."] Therefore, we reach the inevitable conclusion that to be a good Muslim one MUST fight and kill for Allah. Or as Sahih Bukhari says in his "Book of Jihad": "Jihad is holy fighting in Allah’s Cause with full force of weaponry. It is given the utmost importance in Islam and is one of its Pillars. By Jihad Islam is established, Allah is made superior and He becomes the only God who may be worshiped...." Any system that inverts good and evil as Islam does has only one author: Satan.
Name: Gurcharan
Date: Saturday July 28, 2007
Time: 08:46:05 -0700
Comment
There are only two kinds of muslim - one is the fanatic extremist, the other is the moderate who supports the first kind.The only good muslim is one who recognises the existence of other human beings within their midst.
Name:
Date: Thursday November 01, 2007
Time: 07:32:14 -0700