‘Muslimsplaining’ Islamic Terrorism Away

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam. He is completing a book on the international challenges America faces in the 21st century.


ATTACK AFGHANISTANAs bloody bodies and smoke rise into the air after a cry of Allahu Akbar and a bomb detonation, each Muslim terrorist attack is followed by “Muslimsplaining” why the latest act of Islamic violence had nothing to do with Islam.

Sometimes the Muslimsplainers are Muslims. Often they aren’t even Muslims.

When Boko Haram, an Islamic terrorist group aligned with Al Qaeda, kidnapped Nigerian girls, the media’s Muslimsplainers sprang into action to explain why it had nothing to do with Islam.

Time featured “5 Reasons Boko Haram is Un-Islamic”; a listicle friendly article from one of those non-Muslim experts on why Islam is feminist

“With their sustained campaign of murders and kidnappings, the members of Boko Haram conduct themselves in a manner that could barely be more alien to the Prophet Muhammad teachings,” the article claimed.

Mohammed spread Islam through a sustained campaign of murders and kidnappings. Claiming that murder was alien to Mohammed is like claiming that pledge drives are alien to PBS.

As proof, Time cited a statement from Saudi Arabia’s grand mufti, Sheikh Abdulaziz al-Sheikh, that Boko Haram was “set up to smear the image of Islam.”

This is the same Sheikh al-Sheikh who called for destroying all the churches in the region and  marrying off 10-year-old girls. Destroying churches and raping schoolgirls is exactly what Boko Haram stands for. If you believe the media, the same grand mufti who supports raping children in Saudi Arabia as Islamic… opposes raping them in Nigeria as un-Islamic.

The only reason the double Sheikh who speaks out of both sides of his mouth denounces Boko Haram and other Al Qaeda groups is because he is a mouthpiece for the Saudi ruling family which opposes them.

Saudi Arabia isn’t opposed to Al Qaeda because it’s un-Islamic. It’s opposed to Al Qaeda because the Islamic group wants to replace the House of Saud, upsetting the deal between Wahhab and Saud that created a balance between the tyrannical royal family and the mosque.

Saudi Arabia and its mouthpieces don’t oppose Al Qaeda because it’s un-Islamic. They oppose it because it’s too Islamic for them.

Muslimsplaining by non-Muslims is dishonest. Time claims that Mohammed opposed harming women and other non-combatants when he and his men enslaved and raped captured women. It claims that Islam opposes forcibly marrying off underage girls, when Mohammed married an underage girl and the very Muslim religious leader quoted by Time in its introduction supports it.

Time claims that Boko Haram’s war against Christians is un-Islamic and yet the grand mufti it cites who called for the destruction of Christian churches based his demand on Mohammed’s deathbed statement, “Two religions shall not co-exist in the Arabian Peninsula.”

If we are to believe Time, not only is Boko Haram un-Islamic but so is the grand mufti that Time quoted to prove Boko Haram is un-Islamic.

And so is Mohammed.

If Mohammed is un-Islamic because he raped girls, enslaved women and murdered religious minorities in a campaign of violence and slavery… is there even an Islam?

Either Mohammed, the founder of Islam, is un-Islamic so that Islam, as defined by the Muslimsplainers, doesn’t exist. Or the Muslimsplainers are lying about Islam.

Muslim countries are some of the world’s most religiously intolerant places and they are also the places most likely to treat women and girls like dirt. You can either believe the independent statistics, the quotes from Muslim clerics and from Mohammed… or the Muslimsplainers who claim that the condemnation of Boko Haram by a totalitarian Islamic country whose religious police shoved schoolgirls back to die in a burning building because their hair wasn’t covered proves that the group has nothing in common with the moderate form of Islam practiced in Saudi Arabia.

Muslimsplaining by Muslims is even more offensive to the victims of Islam.

Sheikh Mostafa Elazabawy of the Masjid Manhattan mosque resigned from the interfaith advisory panel to the 9/11 Museum and warned that a documentary about terrorism would offend Muslims.

This was the same Sheikh Elazabawy who called Jews a “cancer.” Muslimsplainers like Elazabawy want tolerance, but they aren’t willing to give it in return. They aren’t really for tolerance, but for carving out spaces of Muslim privilege.

That’s not any different than what Islamic supremacist groups like Al Qaeda or Boko Haram do. The only difference between Muslim supremacist “moderates” and “extremists” is that the extremists are honest about their supremacism while the moderates hide behind tolerance.

“The film ignorantly implies a religion, rather than a group of criminals, was to blame for the September 11 attacks,” CAIR insisted.

Criminals don’t commit suicide by flying planes into buildings. Criminals seek to profit from their crimes. The 9/11 hijackers were willing to die because they believed that they would be reborn in a paradise filled with eternal virgins and young boys serving wine.

The checklist for the 9/11 hijackers told them to read the Koran into their hands and touch their knives and passports to endow them with magic Koran powers. It promised them that airport security would not stop them except through the will of Allah. When they attacked, they were urged to shout praises of Allah and to remember that “the women of paradise are waiting.”

“Strike for Allah’s sake,” the 9/11 hijackers were told. “Implement the way of the prophet in taking prisoners. Take prisoners and kill them. As Allah said: ‘No prophet should have prisoners until he has soaked the land with blood.’”

These are the motives of religiously devout men who worship death and killing.

Do the Muslimsplainers of CAIR really believe that Al Qaeda is a gang of criminals? Under its current leadership, Al Qaeda is effectively a splinter group of the Muslim Brotherhood. CAIR has close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. It also has a history of supporting another Muslim Brotherhood terrorist group, Hamas.

Nihad Awad, the founder and executive director of CAIR, said, “I am in support of the Hamas movement.”

Al Qaeda urged support for Hamas and Hamas denounced the killing of Osama bin Laden saying, “We condemn the assassination of a Muslim and Arab warrior and we pray to Allah that his soul rests in peace. We regard this as the continuation of the American oppression and shedding of blood of Muslims and Arabs.”

CAIR supports Hamas. Hamas supports Al Qaeda. Yet the Muslimsplainers at CAIR would like us to believe that they don’t support Al Qaeda even though it’s a branch of the same Muslim Brotherhood tree. CAIR even took money from an Al Qaeda linked front group.

If Al Qaeda is a gang of un-Islamic criminals, then Hamas which supports Al Qaeda is also an un-Islamic gang of criminals. We can’t believe anything CAIR says about Islam because it is, by its own admission, an un-Islamic gang of criminals.

Since virtually every Muslim organization in this country is interlinked with CAIR, they too are un-Islamic gangs of criminals and we should ignore anything they say about Islam.

Now that the official Muslimsplainers have all outed themselves as un-Islamic criminals maybe we can have an honest discussion about Islam. And that discussion must begin by acknowledging that religious tolerance and respect for the rights of women are un-Islamic.

It’s either that or believe that Al Qaeda and Boko Haram, not to mention Pakistan, Iran,  Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Indonesia, Kuwait, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, with a combined population of about half-a-billion Muslims, are un-Islamic. And then where are we to find any actual Muslims except the hypothetical ones in Muslimsplaining mainstream media articles?

Either the Muslimsplainers are right and real Islam, like real Communism, doesn’t actually exist in any Muslim country on earth, or they’re wrong and real Islam is what we’re dealing with here. It isn’t a gang of un-Islamic criminals kidnapping schoolgirls, blowing up churches, flying planes into buildings, beheading prisoners and murdering people over Mohammed cartoons.

It’s Islam.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Subscribe to Frontpage’s TV show, The Glazov Gang, and LIKE it on Facebook.

  • Judahlevi

    I stopped reading Time magazine decades ago. Apologetics by liberals are completely irrational.

    The real religious intolerance in the world is Christianophobia, not Islamophobia. In Nigeria, and other places around the world, Christians are being slaughtered daily. But do the liberals care? Of course not.

    As a Jew, I will not stand by and let any human being be persecuted or murdered for their religious beliefs. Obama will do and say nothing, but we cannot remain silent.

    • Dyer’s Eve

      Agreed. One murder is one too many.

    • Smoking Hamster

      As a Christian I think the same way and defend Jews and Israel from smears by Islamic supremacists.

      The Muslims have a phrase, “First the Saturday People, then the Sunday people.”

      One reason why I think they are directly persecuting Christians in places like Egypt is because they ran out of Jews…

      • SCREW SOCIALISM

        Coptic Christians in Egypt are attacked too.

        Churches in Pakistan and Nigeria are bombed too.

        Islamofascist kill, and cry Islamophobia! when retaliation hits ‘em.

        • kay

          and they are killing Christians in Iraq

      • kikorikid

        Christians and Jews are specifically mentioned
        in the Quran as “People of the Book” and are
        to receive special attention. Jews first, then the Christians
        are to be eliminated.

      • Americana

        Actually, I don’t believe that phrase is attributable to the Muslims. That’s a phrase whose origins are lost in the mists of time but whose inference is something that can be attributed to Muslims under the current paranoia level if you believe in their nefarious aims for eliminating any and all other religions and their practitioners.

        Your handle keeps making me read you as being SMOKED HAMSTER and I’m curious if you’d make a nice SMOKED HAMSTER SALAD SANDWICH! ;)

        • kay

          ISIS, kidnapping of school girls in Africa, everyday hundreds flee Africa to escape jihad. There are 50 million refugees in the world mostly because of Islamic factions fighting…..that is not paranoia ..simple facts of today’s world

      • BagLady

        The Muslims have a phrase, “First the Saturday People, then the Sunday people.”

        I’ve never come across this phrase before. From where did it spring, pray?

        • Daniel Greenfield

          In a January 1976 article in Commentary, titled “The Return of Islam,” Bernard Lewis wrote, “In the period immediately preceding the outbreak of the Six-Day War in 1967, an ominous phrase was sometimes heard, ‘First the Saturday people, then the Sunday people.’”

          examples pop up from time to time

          http://blogs.cbn.com/jerusalemdateline/archive/2012/04/26/bob-simon-and-bethlehem-christians.aspx

          December 24, 1995 first hand report by Andre Aciman in The New York Times

          Bethlehem University, which is partly supported by the Vatican, has been asked to build a place for prayer to accommodate Muslim students. Koranic words have been scribbled on church walls. A few years ago, a graffito in Beit Zahur, nearby, proclaimed, “First the Saturday people, then the Sunday people.”

          • BagLady

            Words are scribbled all over lavatories. Are we to take them seriously?

          • Daniel Greenfield

            When they’re threats of genocide… yes

          • BagLady

            I read much in the media this week about the Ayatollah’s latest proclamation of “death to America”. Nonsense of course. Lost in translation, as they say. “The jihad will continue until the US ceases” ………. its aggression.

            There is much fighting talk on this site. I have no idea of your hit rate but I guarantee (hope) it’s greater than the visitors to an urinal. I don’t see any stirrings amongst your armchair warriors. I don’t see them marching up Redondo Beach, inciting skaters and jugglers to violence towards “ragheads”.

            Verbal genocidal attacks and wishful thinking.

            Let’s face it, the only threat to our existence is from those self-seeking buffoons we, no, you insist on foisting on the rest of us.

            Perhaps you should give us your own vision of The New World Order.

            Who next, Hillary? Will it all go A over T?

            Will the new enemy be the ‘yeller feller’?

            No question about it.

            So sorry Mr Greenfield. Keep your subjective a

          • Daniel Greenfield

            A great many of your countrymen thought the same thing in the 30s. It took quite a bit to shatter those assumptions.

            My new world order? Everyone under their own fig tree and vine.

          • BagLady

            but from where I sit, I see the West tirelessly pushing us towards deadly confrontations.

            While I see Putin quietly putting his point of view in plain Russian, I hear nothing but aggression and twisted lies coming from the US, and mumblings of agreement from their EU puppets.

          • Daniel Greenfield

            Human nature pushes us toward dangerous confrontation

            Russia has been engaged in more prolonged conflicts than the West.

          • kikorikid

            “Putin quietly putting his point of view…”
            Baggo, Putin is invading the Ukraine
            and are cretinous.

          • kay

            you are either an imbecile or senile. propaganda then action, Nazism, Iraq war, Ireland , Libya, Lebanon

          • BagLady

            Sorry Kay but I’m holidaying in my idyllic home country with my family and really don’t have any interest in arguing with people who have nothing to offer but insults. Off to the beach now. Have a nice day

    • PAthena

      President Barack Hussein Obama is, I think, a Muslim manqué. He defended Islam in his speech in Cairo – ignoramus that he is, he credited Muslims with having invented printing (Johan Gutenberg was from Mainz), the compass (the Chinese invented it), and having founded the first university (the Academy was in Athens, and the first degree granting university was founded in Italy). Obama has ordered that all references to jihad and Islam be deleted from FBI, CIA, etc. files, and has insisted that the jihad attack on soldiers at Fort Hood by Major Nidal Hasan, shouting “Allahu Akba,” be called “workplace violence,” (whatever that means). Obama has a half-brother from Kenya who is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, and his former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had as her close aide, Huma Abedin, whose family are Muslim Brotherhood. So Obama, who did nothing to protect the four at Benghaze, is unlikely to do anything about the situation in Nigeria with the Boku Haram.

      • kikorikid

        All of this falls under “Shariah Compliance”.

        • kay

          I wonder if he believes in FGM

      • Adolphus

        So, technically, anyone in the military, fighting or not, would fall under “workplace violence” and consequently never qualify for purple crosses or other commendations, since it is only their job.

        • BagLady

          I don’t follow your logic. Where is it written that someone killed in the line of duty — or doing their job — would not merit commendation?

          There are many cases of “workplace violence” in civilian life and it follows that the numbers must increase dramatically in the armed forces where the gun is always at the ready and there is much stress.

          • kikorikid

            No Baggo, It does not “Follow”.
            Obama is being “Sharia Compliant”
            when he uses the term “Workplace Violence.”
            Come on Baggo, say it with me, Mohammed was a Mentally-ill brigand-rapist. Say it!

    • SCREW SOCIALISM

      I stopped subscribing to Time magazine decades ago too.

      When Meachem Begin was elected Prime Minister of Israel, the cover story on Begin, to illustrate the correct pronunciation of Begin’s name was for the Time article to say his name is pronounced like “Fagin”.

      I wonder whether the writer of the article, editor, board of Time were “British”.

      • logdon

        As an Englishman I resent that.

        I believe Time magazine is American through and through as were most Obama voters.

        Is Barrack Hussein Obama ‘American’ may be a better question.

        And even better why, less than a decade after 9/11 why did those voters put in place a man with a Muslim middle name?

        Come on, we’re all on the same side here and after Farages Ukip absolute triumph yesterday it looks like us ‘British’ are actually doing something about this malaise which is enveloping the whole world.

        • BagLady

          And even better why, less than a decade after 9/11 why did those voters put in place a man with a Muslim middle name?”

          Good grief! Must we be judged by the daft names our parents give us in our cradles?

          • logdon

            Only when they are specific signifiers of religion.

            You are the classic useful idiot.

          • BagLady

            “Idiot” you call me, while suggesting that if one’s parents choose a name for you like, say, Khan, it predisposes you to a particular clannish mindset.

          • logdon

            I said useful idiot. Look it up.

    • DogmaelJones1

      I stopped reading Time Magazine also decades ago. In fact, I haven’t bought a newspaper in about a decade. But I think Time, if it wants to prevent its demise, could have a great future as the central “textbook” of Common Core. Without much change in its content, style, and composition level, it could appeal to school kids and not adults. It could “get them while they’re young and spare the government the time and money of trying to brainwash adults.

    • JacksonPearson

      No matter how much lipstick they put on this pig, it’s still a pig PERIOD

  • Americana

    I must not be reading the same magazines you do or I must be extracting meaning you’re not even seeing in the words and pictures. I don’t see Boko Haram being explained away in **thought, word or deed.** Boko Haram has rightfully been vilified for the full range of its ideological fantasies (that sharia Salafist Islam is the best-est government ever!). Boko Haram’s image is being shredded in articles, from the descriptions of the gruesome methods used to execute oponents to BH and the fact that sharia law and ethnic confrontation are the first political efforts BH makes when it conquers an area/town.

    If Boko Haram weren’t concerned about journalists’ reports of its governing/conquering practices being accurate, BH wouldn’t have recently tried to upgrade its public relations moves to seem more humane as it continues its campaign to take northern Nigeria. Insisting on the truth of the various events to this war isn’t being an Islamophile, there is STRENGTH in ACCURACY. For instance, I can think of multiple reasons why it is better to truthfully report that the Nigerian schoolgirls were taken so that Boko Haram would be able to trade the schoolgirls for their BH comrades in captivity rather than try to portray them as being seized for Muslim sexual slavery.

    • Judahlevi

      Yes, I am sure everything you say is “ACCURACY” and everything Greenfield says is misleading…

      Again, this person is an Obama apologist.

      • Americana

        I haven’t said everything that Greenfield has written is inaccurate nor do I make the claim that everything I write is undoubtedly accurate. As for accuracy vs inaccuracy on this web site, I certainly say that given that Boko Haram sent a ransom video of the Nigerian schoolgirls to the Nigerian government that to continue to present that incident as Muslim sexual slavery is absolutely ridiculous. This Muslim sexual slavery business is being presented by a few different writers on Front Page Mag as being the truth but it’s belied by what Boko Haram has publicized about their seizure. BH wanted to kidnap a large number of girls to secure a large release of captive Boko Haram. End of story.

        I don’t consider myself anything but ANALYTICAL and I’m extremely non-partisan when I’ve got that strategic thinking going. I’m not an Obama apologist or, if I am, then I’m also an apologist for Pres. George Bush on his tactical choices during his presidential tenure. It’s a sad state of affairs when there cannot be unbiased analysis of events like the attacks in Benghazi because it means we’re condemned to have that event be repeated.

        • Judahlevi

          The poor Boko Haram are just being misunderstood – is that your argument?

          You wouldn’t believe how many partisans have declared to me that they are “non-partisan” or “analytical” (which is another way of saying ‘objective’).

          Sorry, I don’t buy it. You are a “Time” reader.

          • Americana

            You must have missed how often I quoted several different Israeli newspapers on Jihad Watch, from conservative to liberal. Just FYI, I’ll quote the CONSERVATIVE Israeli newspapers I read whenever I’m rebutting your POV or your points just so there’s a verifiable paper trail of what I read and why I read it. FYI, I take the “TIME” to read widely; I don’t just settle for reading Time magazine.

            I’ve never said Boko Haram are misunderstood.

          • Drakken

            Maybe, just maybe, if you ever put your delicate feet on the ground in muslim lands, you actually just might get it.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            I’d like to see Americana in Tahrir Square at night – dressed like a Western woman.

        • kasandra

          I’m having a difficult time understanding your posts. Are you saying that Boko Haram is not Islamic, that Islam is not motivating their actions, and that the kidnapping is just about releasing Boko Haram captives of the Nigerian government? Can’t they both be true? I mean, Boko Haram has a logo. It’s crossed AK-47s below a Koran. So I don’t think you can claim they aren’t Islamist. As Islamists they’ve fought to impose a sharia compliant government in Lagos and to kill or convert non-Muslims. Some of their members have been captured and they want them back. And to get them back they’ve threatened to sell ((if they haven’t already actually sold) their captives into sexual slavery. So do tell, what is it in the reportage of this outrage on FPM that you think is untrue?

          • Americana

            I’ve never claimed Boko Haram are not Islamic. What I’m suggesting is that stripping them of Islamic legitimacy is a propaganda tool being used to weaken the BH movement and it’s a tactic that has been decided upon by the Nigerian government and by high-ranking figures. I’ve never claimed anything as strategically ridiculous as that these large-scale kidnappings are being done purely for Islamic religious reasons. It’s PATENTLY CLEAR these large-scale kidnappings are being done for strategic advantage, they’re the quickest means to an end of getting BH captives freed by the Nigerian government.

            Surely you mean FGM (Female Genital Mutiliation)? Muslim sexual slavery isn’t being done in the case of the seizure of these large-scale kidnappings. Even the “Muslim sexual slavery” being done during smaller raids has been acknowledged to be girls seized to be brides by BH fighters where dowries have been paid. I’m laughing at the whole enhancement of the seizure of these schoolgirls by adding on the threat of FGM because there’s never been an instance where captives have suffered FGM at the hands of Boko Haram.

          • kasandra

            I still don’t get you. It was Boko Haram that threatened to sell the kidnap victims into sexual slavery. And I don’t get how you got to “FGM” from “sexual slavery” which is a doctrine of Islam which allows Muslim men to take captives as “temporary wives” as they like to call them.

          • Americana

            Boko Haram threatened to sell the girls into SLAVERY in the market. They didn’t specify Muslim sexual slavery so even on that score, we have issues w/the presentation of their demands on this web site.

            You used the acronym ‘FPM’ not me. What did you mean by that? I assumed you’d meant Female Genital Mutilation whose acronym is FGM. Since others on this web site have claimed these girls were subjected to FGM en masse, I assumed you also believed that. I don’t BELIEVE THAT these girls underwent FGM.

          • kasandra

            You do go on. What I wrote was “So do tell, what is it in the reportage of this outrage on FPM that you think is untrue?” FPM is Front Page Magazine. You’re the one who injected FGM (Female Genital Mutilation) into the discussion. Now, I haven’t seen any columnist on FPM complaining that BH was engaging in FGM but if a commenter did, you can’t attribute the comment to FPM, OK.

          • Americana

            Simple misunderstanding on my part. But my point still holds, that we’ve got at least 3 different FPM stories that mention the Boko Haram kidnapping as being Muslim sexual slavery. It’s NOT. That is simply not true. Boko Haram issued a RANSOM demand for these schoolgirls and BH backed up the threat and made it more dramatic and time-sensitive by saying they were going to sell these girls in the market.

            Sure, I’d love to say there’s no such thing as a media storm of disinformation and misinformation, but the fact is, NONE of those stories’ headlines or the stories themselves have been corrected to reflect the ISSUING of the ransom demand video. Do you know the ethical differences between ADVOCACY journalism and NON-ADVOCACY journalism?

          • truebearing

            What you believe has very little to do with what is.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            Islam and Current Day SLAVERY!

            Call Sinister Louie Farraklan and uptownsteve for clarification.

          • Daniel Greenfield

            “I will sell them in the market, by Allah. I will sell them off and marry them off. There is a market for selling humans.”

            “Women are slaves. I want to reassure my Muslim brothers that Allah says slaves are permitted in Islam,”

          • Habbgun

            Your argument is completely off. The Palestinian Intifada was a planned event that used a provocation for cover. Moslem attacks in Madrid, Bombay Hotel and so on all will cite a specific provocation. Plenty of murderers say they were provoked. So what. Buddhists, Jews, Hindus, Christians and believers in the Force are not having these same provocations.

            Underlying it all is a religious argument that says a perceived grievance is fine because it will further the penetration of Islam into the world. Kidnapping is wrong. It is used as a tactic yes but a tactic that is morally okay in the eyes of people with a specific philosophy. Your argument is simply saying that if I open with Giucco Piano I am not playing Chess but if I open with Ruy Lopez I am. If the underlying game is that it is Moslem versus infidel at some point you have to define what a Moslem is. You will be surprised about how easy it is to understand it all when you just look at the consistencies and not the individual moves.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            The attack on the US compound in Benghazi was planned – the video was a “provocation” if you worked in the Obama administration and were tasked to speak on the Sunday news shows – to defend Obama and the Muslim Brotherhood.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          The two are not incompatible. Especially when it comes to female prisoners. Boko Haram has signaled both ways.

          The abuse angle is not something that a bunch of Front Page writers made up, as you seem to insist. It came out of BH

          • Americana

            What aren’t incompatible? Muslim sexual slavery and kidnapping for ransom of prisoners?

            No, they’re not. However, as the situation stands NOW, Boko Haram have kidnapped a massive number of girls in order to force the release of Boko Haram prisoners. Unless and until the situation DEVOLVES into Muslim sexual slavery, we do ourselves a disservice by portraying this as a Muslim sexual slavery incident. Sorry, but that’s the way facts are presented and interpreted under journalism rules. For now, it’s a kidnapping for ransom, tomorrow it MAY become a case of Muslim sexual slavery. Writers are certainly more than welcome to hedge their bets and suggest that all sorts of things are being done to these girls but unless and until it is FACTUALLY PROVEN to be a Muslim sexual slavery incident, to report it as such as things now stand is to do a disservice to journalism.

          • Habbgun

            So you are saying if the government doesn’t give in Boko Haram will simply say oops you called my bluff? Isn’t the Moslem belief in forced marriage part of the threat by which the ransom is accomplished? None of this new by the way. Islam has been stealing women for centuries. Do you remember all the provocations or did history remember to remember the outrages and the provocations were too many and too ridiculous to remember.

          • Daniel Greenfield

            Boko Haram kidnapped the girls to spread terror and benefit from the act. They can benefit from it in multiple ways.

            Boko Haram’s leader threatened the sexual abuse of these girls.

            I see no reason to cover that up. And I don’t know why you’re so insistent that no one mention it.

    • truebearing

      You’re babbling in an attempt to distract from the truth. Greenfield is pointing out that while leftist and Muslim apologists are condemning the actions of Boko Haram out of one side of their crooked mouths, they are disconnecting BH from the religion that motivated their heinous actions to begin with, Islam. This is like denying the motive of a murderer who signed a confession. Only someone as obtuse, or dishonest, as yourself could possibly defend such a ridiculous attempt to obscure the truth.

      Your maunderings on BH public relations and your theory on their strategic reasons for committing atrocities is missing the point as well. Pure hogwash.

      • Americana

        I NEVER just babble on. As for whether my strategic pondering of BH tactics are accurate or not, they’re damn well accurate when Boko Haram STATES UNEQUIVOCALLY on a publicly released video that they did a particular action in hopes of achieving a specific aim. Kidnappings have become a means of BH freeing their own captives from government hands and has happened several times. It’s a PROVEN thing. FULL STOP.

        If it’s not obvious to you all, it’s quite obvious to those of us interested in novel approaches to undermining the various jihads that declaring them non-Islamic is a theocratic means of attempting to prevent recruitment and further growth of the BH movement. By disallowing the Boko Haram jihad and its tactics to be considered Islamic, the Nigerian government is attempting to keep the insurgency from growing. The fact there are some imams who continue to sell the other view — that the BH jihad is a legitimate means to an end — is indicative of just how tortured Islam is within its ranks. There is never 100% consensus among the relevant imams on ANY question, never mind on jihads.

        • Drakken

          Here, let me help you out with the many knots you have tied yourself into trying to explain it all away.
          Islam is islam, no matter the stripe, and where ever islam goes, the blood always flows, without exception. What one imam says that is positive, you have thousands that are negative and there is no positive islam.

        • Habbgun

          You are not interested in novel approaches. You are interested in maintaining the Leftist narrative that these are regional conflicts with regional goals. You are not interested in explaining why religious ideas are considered bigotry when practiced by Jews and Christians but Islamic beliefs are so utterly authentic we must keep a multicultural outlook for them.

          You are interested in keeping up a multifaceted intellectual approach to violence which is what advocates of violence always want. A common criminal blames the system when caught. Islam lets the Left collaborate and use the Leftist outlook to further Islamic goals. When one considers the Left as open collaborator or closet Moslems Leftist inconsistencies suddenly evaporate. Patriarchy is simply bad when infidels do it. Please change your name to Europeana. You would be much more comfortable in Leftist Euro enclave than anything really American.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            Habbgun AKBAR!

    • Joe The Gentile

      Saying that one apparent reason has validity does not invalidate other
      reasons–that is ‘false dichotomy’. The skill is in selecting the most important reasons. Jihad ATTRACTS many of the criminally-minded so their actions have criminal rewards as well as being Jihadi.

      A vital point is that Jihad includes much Islam-sanctioned crime. This is a fundamental thing that we need to learn. So it is important to add this to the analysis.

      >> it is better to truthfully report that the Nigerian schoolgirls were taken so that Boko Haram would be able to trade the schoolgirls for their BH comrades in captivity

      This particular motivation seems to have turned up AFTER the world-wide outcry about the capture of the girls for sex-slavery, and the video by their leader explaining his reasons: for selling them at the marketplace like Allah tells him to.

      • Americana

        Joe, if the schoolgirls weren’t taken for a prisoner exchange, the Boko Haram wouldn’t have produced the video demanding a prisoner exchange the next day. Let’s not be so freakin’ full of wishful thinking as to keep supporting this whole Muslim sexual slavery business viz these girls when the truth is exactly the opposite. The threat of “selling the girls in the market” is the equivalent of an American kidnapper saying “I’m going to send you her toes and fingers one by one” after seizing someone’s teenage daughter. Making it out to be the regional business of choice for up and coming jihadis is FINE when it applies. But MSS doesn’t happen to apply in this case. YET.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          Again, kidnapping is a trade in the Muslim world. Prisoners can be ransomed or sold off and/or abused.

          Nobody ‘wishes’ anything. You seem to be insistent on wiping away what Boko Haram has said.

      • SCREW SOCIALISM

        That’s why prisons are wellsprings of converts to Islam.

        You can’t get a better class of new adherents to Islam than from prison populations.

        It is the self proclaimed “fastest growing religion” for horrific reasons.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      I don’t know what magazines you read, but I’ve cited Time which has run multiple pieces.

      As with any Muslim terrorist group, some of the general news stories will report that it’s Islamic, but then those same outlets run editorials insisting that it isn’t, and eventually that argument tends to win out.

      As far as Muslim slavery goes, the two have routinely co-existed in Muslim culture. Female prisoners could be used and then traded back for a ransom of some kind. Boko Haram can play either side. It can sell the girls or trade them for prisoners.

      • Americana

        Daniel, Time has run all sorts of pieces w/varying levels of editorial perspective on what Boko Haram does and what their philosophical underpinnings are. Simply stating what Boko Haram has as its underlying philosophy doesn’t make Time’s analysis of BH motives either pro or con the Boko Haram movement. Do we agree on that point?

        I consider the whole question of whether Boko Haram and other such fundamentalist Islamist movements are Islamic or not is simply a red herring. To me, there’s no way they can’t be considered Islamic. But they can also be seen as MARGINAL POLITICAL GROUPS and separate from the rest of Islam even if they represent themselves as obeying tenets of Islam in the purest sense. This separation of jihad movements from the balance of Islam is true even if there is jihadi philosophy being bandied about in lots of mosques. Individual groups like Boko Haram can and should be vilified regionally and internationally by the highest ranking muftis. We’ll see if these jihadi groups’ worst behavior are curbed by bringing down this kind of wrath on Boko Haram.

        A religion is never totally synonymous w/the philosophy of all its adherents. Look at all the schisms in Christianity. The Church of England basically came about through the selfish apostasy of ONE KING and the guy got away w/it under his rule because he ruled by the grace of God. Martin Luther managed to skewer the Catholic Church in Germany and eventually Luther won out. It’s possible for a religion’s most fervid, twisted followers to be considered by the vast majority of a religion’s adherents to be outside the mainstream religion they practice. Whether anyone likes it or not, that’s how sociology works in this instance.

        But regardless of whether they are considered Islamic, by you, by me or by anybody else, they are also PURELY STRATEGISTS in a military sense, and, in this case, Boko Haram have released a video containing a ransom demand. Therefore this is not a Muslim sexual slavery incident unlike smaller raids where girls have been seized to become BH fighters’ wives. This massive seizure of schoolgirls wasn’t a Muslim sexual slavery incident from its inception and may only become an incident of Muslim sexual slavery if and when the Nigerian government doesn’t decide to trade BH captives for all the girls or frees them by military action. I see Boko Haram as having stepped so far over the line in its cruelty that only its very own members see it as being legitimate. The rest of the Nigerians in that region see it for what it is.

        • Habbgun

          What a joke. I use an extreme strategy aimed at vulnerable civilians and I get to be classified by that. So you would say the SS is a rogue agency because they were a small portion of the German people? That fact that Islam is clustered in mosques and not in rigid hierarchical organization charts doesn’t mean it is not organized and that the strategies it uses aren’t global. Religions are always global. They have core beliefs and the believers follow them. I’m guessing you are not and never have been religious.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            Maybe she’s a religious socialist.

            Atheism is the opium of socialists.

        • Joe The Gentile

          >> I consider the whole question of whether Boko Haram and other such fundamentalist Islamist movements are Islamic or not is simply a red herring.

          >> they are also PURELY STRATEGISTS in a military sense

          Not if you are interested in exposing the underlying anti-humanitarian ideology.

          Is it a red Herring that Hitler and his gangs were Nazis? Is it a red herring that they believed Germans the master race, destined to rule all others, with the right to do so?

          On the face of this, was the ‘final solution’ not also a case of being ‘PURELY STRATEGISTS’, given what they believed and what they allowed themselves in their moral worldview?

          Why is the evil ideology that underpins this wicked behavior of no relevance to you?

          It is you who is delving into the red herrings.

    • Elana Rose Starr

      Oh, you mean like the American news media referring to members of Boko Haram as “insurgents” rather than the terrorists they are? In addition to outright denial of various heinous acts, Muslims and their apologists are consistently using language to ameliorate their image

      • Americana

        You really think there’s only one way to refer to a group like Boko Haram and that a writer has to use the word “terrorist” 20 times in an article for the point to sink in? Accompanying almost every article, you’ve got PHOTOGRAPHS of crucified BH opponents. You’ve got VIDEO of BH executions of political opponents or secularists. Just how much unvarnished truth do you have to see to understand where writers are coming from? I’ve never read articles that “ameliorate” Boko Haram’s image. Unfortunately for you and your concept of the media ‘excusing’ or ‘ameliorating’ Boko Haram’s behavior, BOTH those words apply.

        • Elana Rose Starr

          Yes, I would surmise that we have indeed been exposed to different media.

  • David

    “Muslimsplaining by Muslims is even more offensive to the victims of Islam.”

    I disagree. I can respect CAIR on a certain level because they are advocating for an agenda that they agree with. I have more contempt for leftwingers who claim to be on the side of equal rights, tolerance, women’s rights, etc. but make common cause with the enemies of those ideals. At least CAIR knows what it stands for.

    • truebearing

      So did the N azis. What virtue is there in knowing what you believe in when what you believe in is evil? CAIR enables evil by lying. leftist enable evil by lying. They are all equally culpable. It makes no sense to talk about people who are only somewhat evil.

      • David

        CAIR lies but it’s not dishonest. Anybody who does even cursory research on it knows that it’s an Islamist front group. Leftists lie and they are dishonest about it. It’s like I tell my girlfriends, “I won’t promise never to lie to you, but I do promise never to be dishonest with you.

        • Joe The Gentile

          It’s absolute nonsense that CAIR is not dishonest. They are allowed to be dishonest to the unbeliever in the furtherance of their politico-religion and they often are:

          http://www.investigativeproject.org/4214/cair-ayloush-gives-dishonest-bullying-answer-to

          This is called taqiyya. There are many options for deception open to them: they will outwardly say things like ‘we oppose the killing of innocent civilians’ and in their heads will be ‘non-muslims are never innocent’. They will say things like ‘we oppose terrorism’ and in their heads will be ‘killing for Jihad is not terrorism’.

          Get with the program, David, inform yourself better or you will be an unwitting shill for Jihad.

    • No-obama

      please tell me what YOU STAND FOR ??

      • David

        Honesty.

        • Joe The Gentile

          Good. If you also stand for being well-informed, you will no longer be an unwitting shill for Jihad.

        • truebearing

          If you stand for honesty then you shouldn’t be defending the dishonesty of CAIR.

          • David

            You have done a very good job of missing the point.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            Pot. Kettle.

          • David

            Firetruck. Skyscraper. See, I can write random things too.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            Pot. Kettle is shorthand for

            The pot calling the kettle black.

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_pot_calling_the_kettle_black

            Are you ESL?

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Then again the left itself has never been for tolerance, equal rights, etc so it’s as totalitarian as Islam

      • David

        That’s true which is why I was trying to point out the hypocrisy of many leftwing movements.

    • Habbgun

      You might be right in a way. Islamites can be bribed but they can’t be bought. Pay them off and they still hate you. The bribe is simply a low level business transaction and once transacted is completed. Westerners are harder to bribe but easier to buy. If you were to offer a bribe to an American they would likely be offended but give them a corporate or government job that requires them to turn their back on their religious beliefs etc. and suddenly they completely discover a whole new frame of reference. Its one reason why the Left is always looking for heretics. They know that too many of their own are insincere and will turn again once there is a dollar or social acceptance at stake.

  • truebearing

    “Mohammed spread Islam through a sustained campaign of murders and kidnappings. Claiming that murder was alien to Mohammed is like claiming that pledge drives are alien to PBS.”

    Great line. Great truth. This analogy clarifies the abject absurdity of the enablers who continue to pretend to explain what Islam isn’t, but can’t do it in a way that is consistent with the Quran. Who are we to believe, professional liars or the scripture that Islam is based upon?

    Both the Left and Muslim front groups are banking on people being too lazy to investigate what the Quran teaches. They are counting on political correctness to paralyze people’s ability to observe patterns and draw simple, obvious conclusions.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      The left has no interest in dealing with the religious content of Islam because they don’t take religion seriously. They just frame it within a domestic politicla context as an oppressed minority.

      • Americana

        I’m not so sure that’s the Left’s rationale. To me, they avoid Islam’s religious content because Islam as practiced by these Islamist terrorists is so intransigent. Everyone is aware of what sharia law means and what the sociological structure is under Islam in a theocratic Islamist state. The Left isn’t IGNORANT of what this means. There is no room for discussion. There’s no political framework nor legal framework that exists separate from sharia. This is simply not how Western politics operates Sure, there may be religious components to each politician’s or party’s arguments and perspective, but no one expects the religious components to totally dominate the conversation or the result of the political conversation because we have such diversity within the U.S.

        • truebearing

          Then why doesn’t the Left condemn it? They idiotically conflate school prayer with theocracy in the US. Thet have no problem attacking Christians or Jews. Your theory ignores massive amounts of historical evidence to the contrary.

          The Left is covering for Islam. They are enabling Islam. They know exactly what the Muslims believe and what they intend to do. The Left murdered 100,000,000 citizens in leftist regimes in the recent past. They fully understand the nihilistic mindset of the power-obsessed Muslims.

          • chelmer

            That’s because they’ve absorbed the lesson, “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” The Left is interested in weakening traditional America: the core American middle class with its small businesses, religion and tradition of civil rights. That core has to be shrunk and weakened for them to seize the power they need. The groups, causes and movements that they advocate and defend have nothing in common with each other other than that they all share the same target.
            As a strategy it makes sense, because traditional America is the Left’s most powerful opponent. Leftists will sort out their differences with Islam afterwards.First things first.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            Great minds think alike. ;-)

          • Joe The Gentile

            SCREW SOCIALISM gets the Sarcastic Joke AKBAR!

          • Daniel Greenfield

            exactly, Arab Spring went the same way in Egypt

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            It’s the old “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”.

            Hence the Red/Green non-aggression pact.

            Like the Socialist non-aggression pact of 1939.

            Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact – AKA hitler-Stalin Pact
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact

          • Habbgun

            You are 100% correct. Islam and the Left have been united since at least the ’20′s. The Palestinians are the drug of choice for the Left because the Mufti specifically endorsed the Germans as the master race in exchange for support with their fight in the Middle East. The Left is a European phenomenon at its roots and its root belief is the supremacy of Europeans. That is why they don’t care about actual atrocities that Moslems might suffer under (like mass graves in Iraq) but only the made up ones of Paliwood. .The consistency of intellectual inconsistency means Islam and the Left are one.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            SCREW Eurabia.

            Eurabia hates Jews, Hates America because the US has eclipsed old Europe.

            Now Eurabia has millions and millions of demanding Muslims.

            I see a war coming.

            We think were are sophisticated, but when it comes time, the old nature resurfaces.

          • kikorikid

            Yes, Yes, and Yes!
            They are both nihilistic and totalitarian.
            Both maintain a delusion of Utopia or Paradise
            AFTER they have done the killing.
            Small fry here but I’m waiting for a
            “Shariah Compliance Patrol” to walk
            down my street.

          • Lightbringer

            It looks as if the left and Islam are allies of convenience at the moment, and each believes that once this alliance destroys Western Civilization it will be the prevailing philosophy, and will then go on to destroy its former ally.

          • Americana

            I believe the Left does condemn terrorism. I certainly don’t read anything that grants terrorists philosophical amnesty. Which seems to be your point — that if any journalist sees and writes about a deeper background to a jihad that it must mean they sympathize. There may be a Muslim imperative operating in all jihads but those jihads must also be analyzed through the local prism of their long-term politics. No one I know fails to appreciate what a whacked idea it is to have all these groups trying to instate Muslim governance via terrorism. No one I know fails to appreciate what terrorism is and how subversive it is.

            I certainly don’t mind prayer in schools. But there is an attempt to advance theocracy that is antithetical to education. Claiming that evolution isn’t scientific fact and that everything we know about evolution indicates a timeframe that blows the Biblical timeframe to smithereens isn’t advancing theocracy at the expense of education to you? Teaching creationism of the type that’s being advocated is simply nonsensical in this day and age.

          • BagLady

            I certainly don’t mind prayer in schools.”

            Neither do I although it seems a totally pointless practice. I recall my years in school: lining up at 8 am before filing into the hall and kneeling for a prayer and then standing for a song and a little talk from the the Head before going to class. Irrelevant nonsense that none of us listened to.

        • Habbgun

          The Left is so fond of saying there are extremists on both sides but then fears and seeks to ignore extremists? I’d love to hear the explanation for that one.

          • truebearing

            Notice the Left excludes itself from “both sides.” Everyone is extreme but them.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          That must be why the left mocks and attacks any attempt at limiting Sharia in the US

          • Americana

            I think passing preventive sharia legal is seen simply as being unnecessary when we have our laws, both state and Federal, that already state the supremacy of the American legal system and state and Federal laws. How many lawyers have you questioned over what the passage of multiple different sharia prevention laws in different jurisdictions is liable to do?

          • kilfincelt

            It is necessary to pass the law that says only American law will be valid in the U.S. because some U.S. courts have tried to institute pieces of Shar’ia already.

          • Americana

            They have NOT TRIED to institute significant sharia law involving trying of felonies and then imposing sharia punishments, etc anywhere in the United States.

            They’ve allowed some sharia family and inheritance law to be offered as an alternative court system just as orthodox Jewish and other religious groups have if they’ve got their own legal canons. This can help w/reducing the American courts caseload by circumventing the American legal system. Although I’m fairly certain both parties have to agree to the matter being decided in sharia court as is also true for orthodox Jewish rabbinical court, etc, I’m not absolutely positive someone can’t force a family matter to go only to a religious court.

            Off to check and make sure that my understanding is correct because now that I’m thinking about it, it seems to me there have been some divorce cases where someone wanted the decision from a rabbinical court to stand and the other party didn’t want to agree to that.

          • Joe The Gentile

            Western legal systems have a tradition of *arbritration* in which *all* parties to a dispute *agree* to have a dispute arbitrated by a particular body, which may or may not be religious. Rabbinical courts have operated under this model in the US; so do Sharia courts. The problem with the Sharia courts is that it is fair to say that the apparent consent of women in particular is not real consent to these courts.

      • CosmotKat

        Or as stated to me by a leftist, “they USE Islam and Marxist Catholics for political purposes when and where it suits them, but would eventually stamp out religion altogether.”

        • BagLady

          Please keep reminding yourself of the deepest meaning of ‘religion’.

          • CosmotKat

            Your comment seems a bit obtuse to me. Perhaps you could enlighten me with respect to the deepest meaning I should remember.

          • BagLady

            LOVE darling, as opposed to hate.

          • CosmotKat

            One wonders why there is so much hate in the hearts of leftists.

      • truebearing

        The Left thinks it can put the Muslim genie back in the bottle when the time is right, but they forget the trouble they’ve had with religious faith in the past. Gramsci understood that a marxist revolution couldn’t succeed without destroying Christianity first. As far as I know, he hadn’t contemplated what it would take to harness Muslim evil to facilitate a revolution that included a plan that could effectively disarm a religious cult already armed with nuclear weapons, that categorically will not share power.

        The hubris of the Left in not taking other religions seriously will be their downfall, but man’s as well. At the very least, they have helped arm the Muslims with weapons that has made obsolete the rationality in the deterrent of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) and opened the door to the irrational incitement of Inevitable Mutual Destruction (IMD). It’s mighty hard to avoid a fight with people who believe dying in battle is the highest of human achievements.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          in the Middle East, the Islamist genie has swallowed the left each time

          in Egypt, they were forced to turn back to the military now

          • truebearing

            As death cults go, the Left is outclassed by the Muslims. The Left kills plenty of dissenters, deniers, flat-earthers, or any other category they think threatens their power, but the Muslims want to kill everyone, including other Muslims, and even themselves, for the cause. They are the most bloodthirsty cult around.

            The other problem the Left has is maintaining the ties that bind the coalitions of malcontents that give them power.Each of those groups is inherently selfish, so the Left’s only hope is to convince them all that there is one bad guy that is causing all of their problems. The bigger that coalition gets, the harder it is to maintain unity. What happens when one group was the favored victim, then gets relegated to second or third place, especially when the new kid in town wants to behead them, and a substantial percentage of the rest of the coalition?

          • kikorikid

            It is one of my fondest wishes that the Egyptian military
            is over in Northeast Sinai waiting for Hamas to be pushed
            out of Gaza. Gotcha!

        • Joe The Gentile

          There is a little strategic element the counter-Jihad West should keep in mind. Not very well-known yet in the West but I suspect Israel is aware of it. I call it ‘strategic virgin denial’: death in a manner which spills no blood does NOT qualify for martyrdom and the 72 virgins. Therefore, neutron bombs are powerfully virgin-denying. Regular nuclear bombs are partially virgin-denying in that people can be killed by radiation. Killing with gas is virgin-denying, but currently illegal. Almost all, if not all conventional weapons are NOT virgin-denying with the notable exception of incendiary bombs and the more humane fuel-air bombs. A big opportunity was missed to kill Bin Laden with a fuel-air bomb. If they did it would have been BIG with Jihadis in a very bad way for them. It would have proved that Bin Laden does not get to heaven.

          • truebearing

            I suppose the psy ops potential is always somewhat of a deterrent. Maybe we should be working on atomizing pig fat and creating weapons that make the battlefield smell like sizzling bacon.

            Bill Clinton could have done serious damage to jihadist momentum if he had just done his job and accepted the Sudan’s offer to arrest Bin Laden, Atta, and most of core Al Queda. Instead he bombed an aspirin factory and killed some camels with cruise missiles. More great leadership from the Left.

          • Joe The Gentile

            Pig-contamination would be a mere annoyance. It’s not virgin-denying and would not be taken seriously. Virgin-denial would be taken VERY seriously indeed. The supposed fatwa against nuclear weapons from Iran may have some roots in virgin-denial fears.

          • BagLady

            The supposed fatwa against nuclear weapons from Iran may have some roots in virgin-denial fears.

            Firstly, it’s not a “supposed” fatwa. It is written.

            Secondly, do you seek to denigrate a religion by suggesting that sexual urges are the driving force behind violent jihad?

            Do you suggest that Iranians lack intelligence and the desire to live peacefully?

            Do you really want us to believe that Iranians are nihilistic?

            Look to Africa for that. Boom!

          • kikorikid

            Allah’s “Payoff” to the Sexual Urges is the “Driving Force”.

          • Americana

            Hmmm, now I’d hardly call that NOT SPILLING BLOOD. If you vaporize someone, their blood is spilled in every possible direction. The fact their blood is instantly, simultaneously vaporized is neither here nor there. I’m not sure a fuel oil bomb would have succeeded at Bora Bora since he was deep underground within the mountain for much of the time. Since the largest bombs failed to affect some of the deepest tunnels, why would you claim a fuel oil bomb would have worked?

          • kikorikid

            It is “Fuel-Air” not oil.

        • BagLady

          Back in pre 9/11 days religion was always in small print. In the sixties it was mostly in the obituaries and ‘Thought for the Day’.

      • BagLady

        How do you take religion seriously, Daniel?

        I look back in time and see death and destruction all in the name of G-d.. I see cruel retribution. I see peace abiding peoples being robbed and massacred in the name of G-d. I see plagues being passed around the world in the name of G-d, even to the darkest jungles.

        Every carbuncle erupting all over the Middle East and beyond is, supposedly, in the name of G-d or the perception of HIM.

        It seems there are now at least two G-ds. Ours and Theirs. One’s called God and the other’s called Allah, and ne’re the twain shall meet.

        What did atheists ever contribute to this carnage? I’m racking my brains.

        It points me in the direction of atheist = g(o)od, religion = (d)evil.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          Classing all religious people together or all atheists together regardless of content would also class Communists together with Secular Humanists.

          The Broadest categories only tell us so much about what the people actually think and do.

          • BagLady

            Quite so.

            We extrapolate the flu bug from the basic A, B and C to ever increasing sub-categories as our/their knowledge grows. Schizophrenia now has many sub-categories, hitherto unheard of, increasing as we discover our individuality and, probably, new chemicals and changing environmental influences.

            Where do we draw a line?

          • Daniel Greenfield

            With science, we can objectively draw lines around categories, but categories of opinions are far more subjective.

        • TimC

          So, why aren’t you including Lenin, Stalin, Mao in your atheists? The French Revolution was atheist, as well. So, every religion/philosophy can point to bad fruit in its midst. And every religion builds its hospitals and orphanages, where they selflessly, charitably care for the most vulnerable, as well. (Oh, wait, they don’t, do they…)

          • BagLady

            They don’t always build selflessly. Mother Teresa demanded dying Hindus converted to Christianity before they received even the most basic of care….. and I mean basic.

    • kay

      I wonder what excuse ISIS then has

  • http://libertyandculture.blogspot.com/ Jason P

    A decade ago those of us who criticized Islam were branded “bigots” for allegedly “painting with a broad brush” and portraying Islam as monolithic. At least that was an implicit admission that Islamism and jihadism is Islamic.

    Now the apologists are saying that Islam is monolithic and inherently good. Jihadists and violent Islamists are not “real Muslims” and don’t practice Islam. I have no problem with any Muslim who says X, Y, and Z is not part of my practice. But given the history and texts of Islam, Boko Haram is a bona fide Islamic movement.

    I’d have more respect for Muslims and their apologists who confront Islam’s legacy, condemn its crimes, and state that this is no longer acceptable for Islam in the 21st century. That would at least be honest … whether it would be viable is another matter.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      that’s the double standard, positive stereotypes are fine,

  • Edgar Davidson

    In the UK it is a criminal offence (hate crime) to say or write any of the following:

    Islam is a religion that encourages violence
    Islam is a religion of violence
    Mohammed was a peodaphile
    Islam is a supremacist religion
    Muslims support terrorism

    (plus many others). It is also a crime now to descerate a Koran. People have been prosecuted and/or lost their jobs for saying/doing all of the above. The UK media also managed (very successfully) to spin the Boko Haram kidnappings as a story of Muslim suffering:

    http://edgar1981.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/the-uk-media-and-nigerian-kidknappings.html

    • Daniel Greenfield

      it’s coming to the US too

      • Wolfthatknowsall

        Daniel, then they can come after me, and imprison me. That is, if they can catch me.

        The First Amendment to the US Constitution gives me the right … THE RIGHT … to express my opinion openly in public, without fear of prosecution or persecution. If my First Amendment rights are violated, then I shall exercise my Second Amendment rights.

        I don’t mean to sound like some kind of Bible-thumping, gun-waving fanatic. But this is why these rights were given to us, by the Founders.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          You’re right. Unfortunately we’re headed down the Euro rabbit hole and it’s best to prepare.

          For now it’s crowdsourced purges like with Eich, but it’s slowly spreading into criminalization of Koran desecration. And then it’ll be speech in general.

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            Logically, the criminalization of speech is what must follow. Indeed, it has already happened with so-called “hate crimes”.

            If someone commits murder, shortly after uttering something that is not politically correct, it’s still murder. There’s no reason to add “hate” to the capitol felony murder. And this is just one example …

          • Jeff Ludwig

            And there is still a movement afoot (though it has laid low for awhile) to instate the amero as the currency for Mexico, Canada, and the U.S., thus replacing the three currencies that now exist.

        • kikorikid

          Exactamente! “Catch me”?
          I can’t run so the issue will be immediate
          in my case. Leftist and Islamist have never
          dealt with an armed society before.
          First time for everything I guess.
          Waiting.

      • Lightbringer

        The UK and Canada are a bit ahead of the US in this, but remember that they have no equivalent of the First Amendment. Of course we might not, either, if the madness continues.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          it’s being cut away

    • SCREW SOCIALISM

      The UK media spins boko haram as the victim and the 300 kidnapped, shrouded girls victimizers?

      What went wrong in the UK?

  • Dyer’s Eve

    Q: What’s the difference between a good Muslim and a bad Muslim?
    A: There is no difference.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      a bad Muslim is irreligious and therefore a good man

      • Dyer’s Eve

        I have to disagree, Mr Greenfield. They’re all bad. All of them! Through their mischief, lying, half-truths, manipulation and deceit, you can’t tell the cops from the robbers. Their concept of truth is vastly different from ours.

        • truebearing

          It is the devout ones that we really have to watch. The nominal Muslims don’t follow the teachings any more than they have to to keep from being punished. A lot of them would probably be relieved if Islam were to disappear.

          • Drakken

            The so called nominal muslim when push comes to shove, will follow and carry out exactly what the devote muslim is doing.

      • Parisdweller

        “A bad Muslim is irreligious and therefore a good man”.

        I agree, or let’s just say, “can no doubt be a good man”. We shouldn’t put everyone in the same pot. Some of the ‘bad Muslims’ I know over here in Europe couldn’t care less that they were born to Muslim parents. They don’t go to mosques and only want to get on with their lives and jobs like the rest of us. Interestingly, they are even more afraid of ‘good Muslims’ than we are – because they know what those brethren of theirs are capable of.
        A comment I keep hearing is that ‘we as apostates will be the first to have our throats cut’.

        • Drakken

          You either get rid of those so called bad muslims in your midst now, or Europe will devolve to a Balkans type scenario. When that happens, nobody is going to care how so called peaceful a muslim is, they will go with the rest of them.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          that’s true

        • Lea

          Well we can see that in Egypt the current regime targets muslims who wear beards and niqabs. They have even taken out many imams and replaced them with ones that they approve of. They have banned the muslim brotherhood. Since muslims themselves understand that good muslims are dangerous and something to be rejected and expelled and imprisoned, how is it then that we in the West put them into the White House and let them run the CIA? And the muslims are accusing America of aiding and funding muslim terrorism.

    • jaja

      A good muslim is very dangerous because they following instructions from the quran. A bad muslim is most likely playing taqiyya until the time is right to stab us in the back.

    • SCREW SOCIALISM

      One holds his knife in front, the other hides it behind his back.

    • Lightbringer

      The late, great Rabbi Meir Kahane once recalled someone saying to him, “But surely there are good Arabs (in Israel).” He replied, “They’re all good Arabs, and that’s the problem.”

    • Drakken

      A good muslim is shooting at you, the bad muslim is reloading.

  • http://onfollowingchrist.wordpress.com Paul B.

    Outstanding article.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      thank you

  • ObamaYoMoma

    Muslims don’t care about being called terrorists because they know that terrorism isn’t an Islamic manifestation, but call it what it is: an act of violent jihad, and then all of a sudden they want to ban the word jihad. Why? Because jihad, in stark contrast to terrorism, is a holy war waged against infidels to make Islam supreme throughout the world and a fundamental holy obligation incumbent upon all Muslims in one form or another. Meanwhile, terrorism, on the other hand, is just meaningless violence for anything, and because Islam is extremely totalitarian, not an Islamic manifestation.

  • http://libertyandculture.blogspot.com/ Jason P

    There is a temporary interest in Boko Haram’s ideology. Most news reports cover it with or with apology. They have to. It’s integral to the story and the reader will go elsewhere to get the full picture.

    Even Wikipedia describes Boko’s Islamic ideological foundation in it’s “Ideology” section of the Boko article. Wiki editors are allowed to report what’s in “reliable sources” and the news media has reported the ideas of Boko. A few Indonesian editors tried to remove or play down these reports but with no lasting success. There’s even a Spencer reference to Maulana Bulandshahri that comes and goes as editors take it out and put it back in.

    This is a teaching moment.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      If we keep up the fight, yes

  • Rick

    As proof, Time cited a statement from Saudi Arabia’s grand mufti, Sheikh Abdulaziz al-Sheikh, that Boko Haram was “set up to smear the image of Islam.”
    Islam doesn’t need any help to smear it’s image. Muslims do it every day by their actions and deeds throughout the world. I still look at Time now and then just to see what new spin they come up with to justify the horrid actions of the followers of Islam.

    • Americana

      There is propaganda in “excommunicating” Boko Haram members by claiming they’re doing things contrary to their faith. If this weren’t true there wouldn’t be such a large number of high-ranking Muslims saying this. There may be outlying political imams whose entire reputation rests on their jihadi philosophy and political connections who are saying pro-Boko Haram statements but if Islam’s biggest guns have begun decrying what Boko Harma are doing, it’s for very good reasons.

      • Daniel Greenfield

        they’re not doing things contrary to the faith, they’re doing things contrary to a specific faction or group, in this case the Saudi royals

        • Texas Patriot

          The Saudis are very astute. They know that violent jihad is very bad for the family business.

          • Daniel Greenfield

            The Saudis are thinking big picture clash of civilizations. They still sponsor some terror, but it’s a subset of a bigger agenda.

            They’re pushing their clergy everywhere, building mosques, organizing the Muslim diaspora in the West and poorer Muslim countries in Asia around their agenda.

          • Texas Patriot

            Rather than a clash of civilizations, I think they see one civilization being slowly devoured by another one without even knowing it.

          • Daniel Greenfield

            yes

          • Texas Patriot

            The genius of their plan is that the Saudis have figured out that money makes people very comfortable, and it is very difficult when you’re very comfortable to realize you’re in mortal danger. That is, until it’s too late to do anything about it.

          • chelmer

            It’s a strategy, in my opinion, that makes sense. The West is approaching the state of moral collapse that the Roman empire was approaching when Christianity arrived on the scene. Judaism was around, but it was a hard, painful and complicated process converting to Judaism. Christianity offered a simple, painless, relatively easy alternative that appealed to people at a time when Roman theological views were a hodgepodge of sick and contradictory mythologies. People were sick of the crucifixions, the depravity, the moral cesspool that was Rome. And, back then, Christianity was unafraid to use force.
            I think the West is sick of itself, and yearns for something a little better. Christianity, while still viable in some forms, has no mechanisms for defending itself today. Christianity by definition is non-violent in its essence, and only grew because it ignored its violent internal contradictions, which today it no longer ignores. Islam is violent, bloody and judgmental–that’s worth a lot in the transgendered, infantalized, anti-religion, anti-male culture that has evolved in the West.

          • Drakken

            There is one paradigm that that always is predictable, human nature, and when push comes to shove, nature always finds a way.

          • Lea

            Do you recall that Osama bin Laden was a Saudi and that the majority of the 9/11 muslim monsters where from Saudi Arabia?

          • Texas Patriot

            Do you recall that OBL wanted to bring down the house of Saud along with all the other established regimes in the Middle East?

          • Lea

            So then, it is not because of ideological differences, or a more tolerant Islamic view of the Saudis that causes them now to oppose their very own creation, and only in their own domain too, it is simply that they protecting themselves from the monster child they gave birth to.

          • Texas Patriot

            Basically, I think it’s a question of tactics. OBL favored a more direct and immediate form of violent jihad, whereas the Saudis favor a slower and more indirect form financial and cultural jihad, but the overall object is the same: subjugation or elimination of non-Muslims.

        • Lea

          The Saudis are the ones who plough their money into the unholy jihad, setting up mosques and protecting war criminals like Bashir of Sudan who is currently continuing with him muslim genocide on the south Sudanese and black muslims, in a bid to regain control over the oil, while al-shabaah, another Saudi funded islamist militia is currently waging unholy jihad on the Kenya to stop the south Sudanese from finding another route for their oil pipelines etc. The House of Saud are afraid of their own muslim terrorists because there is the perception being created that the Saudis are aligned with Israel and the US.

      • Drakken

        There you go again, wishing and kumbaya singing to high heaven. It is amusing to say the least that you folks on the left grasp at any straw and give moral equivalence to a so called religion that wants you dead. Islam will never ever be reformed period, but you keep wishing that it will be, you are wrong, dead wrong and you and others of your ilk are going to find that out the hard way.

      • Lea

        The big meeting of the muslims in America revealed their spokesperson as saying that one cannot excommunicate Boko Haram for it would be tantamount to trial by abstenia.

    • Lea

      The publication is probably owned and managed by freemasons and Marxists, even muslims.

  • Texas Patriot

    After more than forty years of explanations since Islamic terrorists attacked Israeli athletes at the Olympic Village in Munich in 1972, what is left to explain? After more than forty years since the Arab Oil Embargo of 1973 when Saudi Arabia announced that oil would be used as a political weapon, what is left to explain? After more than forty years of atrocities committed around the world by Islamic extremists yelling “Allahu Akbar”, what is left to explain? That Islam is a religion of peace? Why of course it is.

    • Lea

      as the Bible says: Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil etc.

      • Texas Patriot

        As Jesus said, be wise as serpents and innocent as doves.

  • AlgorithmicAnalyst

    Thanks Daniel!

  • Libslayer

    Muslimsplaining – taqiyya by proxy.

  • Wolfthatknowsall

    Yeah, let’s send 80 unarmed troops to Nigeria, in order to get these girls back. That’ll show Bozo’s Harem …

    • Libslayer

      They are there to provide twitter access to the Boko haram, so they can understand that our president is really really mad.

      • Wolfthatknowsall

        Hashtags? Yep, he’s really mad. Any minute, he’s going to hit the links …

        • Daniel Greenfield

          http://www.duffelblog.com/2014/05/boko-haram-bringbackourgirls/

          “This is a whole new theater of warfare,” said MARFORCYBER spokesman Lt. Col. Brock Ruggedsson. “The Marines of the MEH will significantly impact world events 140 outraged characters at a time. They will heed the clarion call of battle not in the front line but in the social media trenches online. The MEH will fight our countries battles via Twitter, on Facebook, and YouTube.”

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            I think that we should put a true combat veteran … Hitlery was, after all, shot at as she landed in Bosnia (at least, she says she was) … into 180 lbs of equipment, an M4 with a full loadout of ammo and grenades, and send her after Bozo’s Harem.

            My apologies to Bozo …

          • Texas Patriot

            Ive always been a big fan of the Commanches. Supposedly they learned to ride from the Spanish in Mexico and went on to become the best horsemen in the world. Their weakness, of course, is that they preferred war to peace, and it ended up destroying them. Just imagine if the Commanches had become Christian. The greatest warriors combined with the greatest peacemakers. Now that’s a formula for America that even Barry Goldwater could support.

          • Drakken

            Horsemen versus western weapons, yeah those horseman had a chance. We played cowboys and Indians and soon we are going to play cowboys and muslims, ask the Indians how well that turned out.

          • Texas Patriot

            Be careful, Drak. Some of Wolfie’s ancestors were Commanches, and there were plenty of settlers who lost their scalps (and a lot more) to Commanche war parties. Eventually, the Indians were defeated by General Sheridan’s idea of killing all the buffalo. Without a reliable food supply, most Indians simply starved to death. Otherwise, there would have been even more massacred settlers.

  • De Doc

    I always wonder if the Islam apologists, both Muslim & non-Muslim, ever get tired of the same canned arguments and excuses to wish away the association between Islamic doctrine and the morally reprehensible actions of the terrorists born if it. The repetition has reached the ad nauseum phase and I just can’t figure out how these folks continue to argue for Islam as they want it to be rather than Islam as it is. This is the most blinkered form of denialism that I’ve ever seen.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      it’s comforting to them

      • kikorikid

        Always good stuff, Daniel!
        Yes,”its comforting to them” because
        it maintains their delusions.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          which form their worldview

  • Walter Sieruk

    The cruel murderous and heinous violence and killing of the militant jihadism of Islam that the Muslims who are jihadtists engage in never bother the jihadists at all. The reason for this is explained in the Bible. For the Bible teaches that some peope are so evil that they have “their conscience seared with a hot iron.” First Timothy 4:2. [KJV]. The “Hot Iron” is this case is Islam, Sura 2:216. 9:111,112. 47:4.

  • Sniper’s Virtue

    Well done sir. Right on point!

    • Daniel Greenfield

      thank you

  • SCREW SOCIALISM

    SOCIALISM destroyed Britain.

  • kikorikid

    Great discussion about the “Taqiyya Meisters”.

  • Jeff Ludwig

    I have found recently that biting sarcasm definitely gets into the “bones and marrow” of the left wing Muslim justifiers and excusers. This article is a model for all of us to follow in terms of using irony, ridicule, sarcasm, and “plunging of the knife” (with words).

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Because they tend to be from the left. Lefties are convinced of their superior intelligence, culture and style. They’re narcissists and they don’t deal well with disruption.

  • HWGood

    “Boko Haram was “set up to smear the image of Islam”
    Really? The image of islam is a pair of bloody hands, one holding a bomb to blow up unsuspecting innocents and the other holding a knife to behead helpless victims.
    How do you smear that?

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Islam keeps smearing the image of Islam. If only Islam stopped smearing Islam, people would stop having negative impressions of Islam

  • Jay

    There is no better Muslimsplainer than Dean Obeidallah from The Daily Baest

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/05/22/how-we-stop-the-next-boko-haram.html

  • MN dude

    I wish all of us who don’t want Islam in our lives could just take over New Zealand or something and just watch the rest of the world burn.

  • objectivefactsmatter

    “Saudi Arabia and its mouthpieces don’t oppose Al Qaeda because it’s un-Islamic. They oppose it because it’s too Islamic for them.”

    The Sauds argue (in Arabic) that they are the unofficial rulers of the Muslim world. Therefore anything that goes against their interests must be “un-Islamic” for that reason alone.

    And the Sauds prefer stealth jihad with plausible deniability for acts of terror. So in reality they are all following Islam and they all know it too. These are old and well-established paradigms.

    • Lea

      Wahabbism is a Saudi phenomenon and its root is with the few hundred people who still speak the language of the ancient Quraish, the tribe of the false profit of Arabia. This language is called classical Arabic. These are the salafis who are considered too Islamic because they take the Koran too literally. The only reason the House of Saud and gulf states are having a problem with al-Qaeda is because these muslim monsters want to oust them too. Most of the 9/11 muslim monsters where Saudis as was Osama bin Laden.

  • thanhzenhth

    Agreed. One murder is one too many :D
    Sữa bột cho bé

  • JustOne
  • Shel Zahav

    It’s Islam, stupid!

  • BagLady

    When Boko Haram, an Islamic terrorist group aligned with Al Qaeda,
    kidnapped Nigerian girls, the media’s Muslimsplainers sprang into action
    to explain why it had nothing to do with Islam.”

    Oh come on, have you ever met a Boko Haram member? Probably never had a pair of trainers (American – second hand AID freebies, for sale on the local market) nor three square meals in a day. The promise of such luxuries is enough to turn these illiterate young men into (freedom) fighters. It’s amazing what hunger will do for your beliefs.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Statistically Islamists tend to come more from the middle and upper classes. That may not be as true in Nigeria as it is in Pakistan or the UK, but it’s not hunger that makes one blow up a church or kidnap some girls.

  • AlgorithmicAnalyst

    Thanks Daniel!!!

  • kay

    but they are Muslim, they are Islamic….do not kid your self…

  • kay

    The Ukraine is a part of the EU, really the EU should help to protects it’s borders and restore order. Putin can be a mischievous boy that can go too far. Putin’s entire point is that Nato allowed Kosovo to annex,, then why not the Ukraine ?

  • Hellosnackbar

    It’s time for satire with the black comedy of Islam as the subject!
    PC poison prevents this !
    Free speech to place imaginary Allah and mendacious Mo where they belong, is also a necessary aspect of civilisation.
    Allah is just one example of sky fairy tales.
    Islam ideologically belongs with communism and fascism!