User Rating: 0 / 5

Star InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar Inactive
 

Recently, I came across the article “75 Reasons Why Muslims Must Stop With Their Terrorism Condemnation Ritual” by Ismail Ibrahim.

I thought it deserved something of a reply.

In the interests of brevity (how well achieved you may decide) I will not go through it point by point, rather I will group the “75 reasons” under heads, thus I regret that you will have to look at the original article to follow my reasoning.


A. Tu-toque reasoning. Otherwise “It's ALL the fault of the West.”

Points #1, 16, 33, 37, 39, 40, 41, 59, 61-a classic, 65. (10 instances.)


B. Irrelevancy.

Points #2, 19, 67. (3 instances.)


C. Muslim supremacy aka “we're fine as we are and don't need to change”.

Points #3, 8, 29, 30, 35, 51, 57; (6 instances.)

 

D. Conflation of crime and religiously motivated terrorism. Pretending that two radically different things are the same is an obfuscation technique.

Points #1,4,7, 14, 21, 35, 54, 57, 60, 72; (10 instances.)

 

E. “We're the REAL victims!” Also “Why's everybody always picking on me?” (If you're a victim you can't be to blame.)

Points #6, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 21, 27, 30, 34, 37, 38, 40, 42, 43, 44, 47, 48, 50, 55, 57, 64, 68, 69; (24 instances.)

 

F. “Sharia is best.” - and  turns Islamic terror into 'noble' Jihad.

Point #8.

 

G. “They're all mental cases”. Islamic terrorism is the product of mental illness – which implies that there are a lot of mentally ill Muslims around!

Points #9, 39.

 

H. “All Kuffar are destined for hell anyway.”

Point #9.

 

I. “You shouldn't align yourself with the Kuffar.” The writer performs a bit of legerdemain by referring to “right wing” and/or “Islamophobic” writers etc. This also includes some references to such “non-Muslim Muslims” as Ahmadhis.

Points #10, 18, 20, 62. (4 instances.)

 

J. “The West is trying to destroy Islam!”

Points #15, 60.

 

K. “How dare you question our Allegiance.” Otherwise: home-grown terrorists don't mean all Muslims aren't loyal to their Country of residence.

Point #17.

 

L. “It's nothing to do with us anyway.” This is the Islamic doctrine of Bara'ah by which Muslims can exonerate themselves from the actions of other Muslims carried out in the name of Islam.

Points #22, 45, 57, 66. (4 instances.)

 

M. “The REAL problem is ISLAMOPHOBIA!”

Points #23, 24, 35, 26, 39, 41, 46, 48, 53, 56, 68, 70, 71, 74. (14 instances).

 

N. “Nothing will stop Islamic terror.” - because it is part of Islam's “DNA”, though Ibrahim is not admitting to this of course.

Points #28, 31, 32, 37. (4 instances.)

 

Conclusion

The most common reasons the writer gives are related to Islamophobia (14 instances) and Muslims-as-victims (24 instances). Thus the most common thrust of Ismail Ibrahim's argument revolves around the “victimisation” of Muslims, primarily by the West.

Apparently the argument is that since Muslims are the main victims of Islamic terror and they are “victimised” by the West they are not to blame for the terrorism within the Islamic canon.

Whilst the premise is true -more Muslims than non-Muslims are killed by Islamic terrorism - it is a non-sequitur to imply that because Muslims are victims of Islamic terror and/or they are “victimised” by the West then such terror “has nothing to do with Islam” or that Muslims bear no responsibility for enacting it.

 

A second major strand revolves around tu-toque reasoning aided and abetted by Ibrahim's conflation of criminal acts and acts of religiously motivated terror (20 instances between the two).

The third most common strand is related to Muslim supremacy and the fallacy of Muslims aligning themselves to non-Muslims and their stances (10 instances between them), which leads me on to note that there are a few points in which Ibrahim's “kuffarophobic” position is revealed even more clearly.

Also telling is Ibrahim's dismissal of “non-mainstream Muslims such as liberalists and Ahmadis” (#18, 20), but it is his statement that the media should not give prominence to “so-called 'moderate' Muslim voices that have zero grassroots support among observant Muslims” (#49) which is most revealing.

If it is not the “moderates” who represent Islam, who is it?

Ismail Ibrahim  does not say.

Joomla templates by a4joomla