Read Online The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam by Robert Spencer - Free Book Online
Authors: Robert Spencer
Ads: Link
and elsewhere, it is not because the teachings of jihad have been reformed or rejected; they have simply been ignored, and history teaches us that they can be remembered at any time.
Chapter 4
ISLAM: RELIGION OF INTOLERANCE
M uslim spokesmen in the United States have worked hard to present a vision of Islam as benign, open, and accepting—worlds away from the fanatical intransigence of Osama bin Laden and his ilk. PC watchdogs, both Muslim and non-Muslim, have virtually ruled out any dissent from the idea that Islam is peaceful, benign, and tolerant to a degree that will present no problem whatsoever for Western societies. They depict Islam as akin to Judaism and Christianity and, like them, liable to be “hijacked” (through no fault of its own) by “extremists.” Most Americans today accept this as axiomatic—and many would consider rejecting it an act of “racism,” despite the fact that Islam is not a race and most Muslims in the world today are not members of the ethnic group with which they are most often identified, the Arabs.
Guess what?
Islamic law mandates second-class status for Jews, Christians, and other non-Muslims in Islamic societies.
These laws have never been abrogated or revised by any Islamic authority.
The idea that Jews fared better in Islamic lands than in Christian Europe is false.
But there’s just one problem with the common view: It isn’t true. We’ve already seen how thoroughly Islam is a religion of war; it is also, profoundly, a religion of intolerance.
PC Myth: Islam is a tolerant faith
Jews and Christians, goes the PC line, lived in harmony with Muslims during the era of the great Islamic empires of the past. When jihad terrorists bombed Madrid on March 11, 2004, commentators unctuously reminded the world that when Muslims ruled Spain, it was a beacon of tolerance where Muslims, Jews, and Christians lived together in peace and harmony. When jihadists bombed synagogues in Istanbul on November 15, 2003, the commentators intoned that the bombings were particularly heartbreaking in a city that for so long had known tranquility among Muslims, Jews, and Christians.
This unquestionable dogma of Islamic tolerance has important political implications. It discourages anti-terrorism investigators in Europe and America from monitoring activity in mosques. It helps perpetuate the mistaken notion that Islamic terrorism comes from political grievances and socioeconomic imbalances. European governments with rapidly growing Muslim populations use it to reassure themselves that in old Al-Andalus, Islamic hegemony wasn’t all that bad. European and American politicians and religious leaders woo the growing Islamic communities in their nations, trying to win their political support and assuming that they will assimilate easily and become peaceful, active participants in the political process. Why not? Islam is tolerant and teaches pluralism. What could be a better foundation for participation in Western democracy?
The idea of a tolerant Islam has even been taken up at the United Nations. The Turkish daily Zaman reported in March 2005 that at a UN seminar, “Confronting Islamophobia: Education for Tolerance and Understanding,” “the tolerance that Ottomans showed to people of different religions was held up as an example to be adopted even today” and was lauded as a “social model in which different religions and nations lived under the same roof for hundreds of years.” 1
It doesn’t seem to have come up at the UN that when the different religions lived under the same roof, one was the master and the others lived as despised inferiors.
The dhimma
The Qur’an calls Jews and Christians “People of the Book;” Islamic law calls them dhimmis , which means “protected” or “guilty” people—the Arabic word means both. They are “protected” because, as People of the Book, they have received genuine revelations (“the Book”)
Chapter 4
ISLAM: RELIGION OF INTOLERANCE
M uslim spokesmen in the United States have worked hard to present a vision of Islam as benign, open, and accepting—worlds away from the fanatical intransigence of Osama bin Laden and his ilk. PC watchdogs, both Muslim and non-Muslim, have virtually ruled out any dissent from the idea that Islam is peaceful, benign, and tolerant to a degree that will present no problem whatsoever for Western societies. They depict Islam as akin to Judaism and Christianity and, like them, liable to be “hijacked” (through no fault of its own) by “extremists.” Most Americans today accept this as axiomatic—and many would consider rejecting it an act of “racism,” despite the fact that Islam is not a race and most Muslims in the world today are not members of the ethnic group with which they are most often identified, the Arabs.
Guess what?
Islamic law mandates second-class status for Jews, Christians, and other non-Muslims in Islamic societies.
These laws have never been abrogated or revised by any Islamic authority.
The idea that Jews fared better in Islamic lands than in Christian Europe is false.
But there’s just one problem with the common view: It isn’t true. We’ve already seen how thoroughly Islam is a religion of war; it is also, profoundly, a religion of intolerance.
PC Myth: Islam is a tolerant faith
Jews and Christians, goes the PC line, lived in harmony with Muslims during the era of the great Islamic empires of the past. When jihad terrorists bombed Madrid on March 11, 2004, commentators unctuously reminded the world that when Muslims ruled Spain, it was a beacon of tolerance where Muslims, Jews, and Christians lived together in peace and harmony. When jihadists bombed synagogues in Istanbul on November 15, 2003, the commentators intoned that the bombings were particularly heartbreaking in a city that for so long had known tranquility among Muslims, Jews, and Christians.
This unquestionable dogma of Islamic tolerance has important political implications. It discourages anti-terrorism investigators in Europe and America from monitoring activity in mosques. It helps perpetuate the mistaken notion that Islamic terrorism comes from political grievances and socioeconomic imbalances. European governments with rapidly growing Muslim populations use it to reassure themselves that in old Al-Andalus, Islamic hegemony wasn’t all that bad. European and American politicians and religious leaders woo the growing Islamic communities in their nations, trying to win their political support and assuming that they will assimilate easily and become peaceful, active participants in the political process. Why not? Islam is tolerant and teaches pluralism. What could be a better foundation for participation in Western democracy?
The idea of a tolerant Islam has even been taken up at the United Nations. The Turkish daily Zaman reported in March 2005 that at a UN seminar, “Confronting Islamophobia: Education for Tolerance and Understanding,” “the tolerance that Ottomans showed to people of different religions was held up as an example to be adopted even today” and was lauded as a “social model in which different religions and nations lived under the same roof for hundreds of years.” 1
It doesn’t seem to have come up at the UN that when the different religions lived under the same roof, one was the master and the others lived as despised inferiors.
The dhimma
The Qur’an calls Jews and Christians “People of the Book;” Islamic law calls them dhimmis , which means “protected” or “guilty” people—the Arabic word means both. They are “protected” because, as People of the Book, they have received genuine revelations (“the Book”)
Similar Books
