Showing posts from October, 2011

Islam or Islamist

The whole issue of whether there is a difference between Islam and Islamism; between a "religion" and a theo-political ideology; between "moderate" and"extremist"; between "reformer" and "fundamentalist"; and so on, all these are subject of intense debate, not least within the non-Muslim community.
This article by Andrew McCarthy is a very good summary of one point of view: that there is indeed a difference between Islam and Islamism.
I agree with his "opponent" on this issue, Robert Spencer, who says there is no meaningful difference. BUT, I think it's important, tactically, to act as if there IS a difference: for otherwise, the enemy, the threat we face, is simply too big. We can't take on the whole of Islam and all Muslims.  But we can take on Islamism and extremist Muslims, with the help of Muslims, as well.

Update: Raymond Ibrahim expatiates on this issue as well:
What are the differences between the traditional Mus…

Sup from Dim Sum bonds; don't suck up to Sharia compliant Sukuks

[Letter to South China Morning Post]
Why doesn’t John Tsang just give up on Islamic Finance? (“No Islamic Bonds despite 4-year push", Business, October 29).  He’s failed to tap the market, so now he wants to give them tax breaks.  Give us a break, Mr Tsang!

The article states that Sharia-compliant, or sukuk, bonds prohibit interest, or investments in pork, tobacco and casinos. But it’s worse than that.  They also prohibit investments in companies or products that benefit non-Islamic religions; any project that promotes equal rights for women and gays; any western defence industries (but not Muslim ones); any western books, films, TV and radio.  And, of course, they prohibit investment in any company having links with Israel. In short, they are egregiously discriminatory.  And I would argue that such discrimination is illegal by Hong Kong’s laws.

More: Islamic finance products have been linked with funding to terrorist organisations.  A portion of Sukuk moneys have to go to Islamic…

"Thought without learning is dangerous" -- the Master

[To South China Morning Post]
I would like to weigh in on the discussion of Chinese characters by Wang and Dunn (“Revival of old characters isn’t likely”, Letters, October 29).
I write as one who learnt the simplified characters at the Peking Language Institute and Peking University in 1976, then the “old” characters at the Chinese University of Hong Kong in 1977.
First, it was easier for me as an adult to learn the simplified characters first and then the traditional (“old”) characters.  The same must surely be true for children learning them. Going from simple to complex is more sensible than going from complex to simple: walk before you run.

Maureen Dowd gets all gooey

Dowd has this thing for Saudi despots.  Princes, Ambassadors, anyone representing this foul regime, and she goes all gooey.  Remember last year, when in no less than three articles, she let herself be punked by Prince Saud (he of the "aviator glasses", and "demeanor of a Hollywood mogul").  Why, she even headlines one of those articles "Loosey goosey Saudi" bringing to mind Henry Miller's use of "wet as a goose"....
It's enough for these louche apologists for the most barbaric regime in the world to look sideways at her and she goes all wet at the knees.
Take her latest swooning, over Saudi Ambassador to the US, Adel al-Jubeir:

“They [the religious police] say they can see the outline of your body,” Jubeir translated.You just know that she's thinking of him seeing the "outline of her body".  How?  Well, try this:
She talks of the "slender, smartly tailored ambassador", of his  "equanimity", of his staying…

"Obama administration bans the truth about Islam and Jihad"

I wrote about the US Attorney General's shocking bit of head-in-the-sandiness here.  A purer and simpler case of refusal to look at what motivates the enemy you could not find.
Robert Spencer covers it more thoroughly here.

It has been a long time coming, but the Obama Administration has now officially banned the truth. Deputy
U.S. Attorney General James Cole declared Wednesday at a conference in Washington that he had “recently directed all components of the Department of Justice to re-evaluate their training efforts in a range of areas, from community outreach to national security.” This “reevaluation” will remove all references to Islam in connection with any examination of Islamic jihad terror activity. The Obama Administration has now placed off-limits any investigation of the beliefs, motives and goals of jihad terrorists.

Pusillanimous Aussie Pissants...

Oh dear oh dear oh dear....
What's wrong with these guys?? They would make Chamberlain seem like a warmonger.
Don't they see the danger of this lily-livered craven kow-towing??
[I registered with The Australian to get the full article pasted below]

Aussie Andrew Bolt decision is indeed limiting Free Speech. But is that good or bad?

A poll on the Sydney Morning Herald about the Australian Federal Court's decision to find against Australian journalist Andrew Bolt,  asked if it had limited free speech.
75% of respondents said that it had not limited free speech.
Now that's nonsense, because by definition -- by punishing Bolt and requiring the expunging of the two offending articles -- speech was constrained, was limited, was purged.
The question should have been:

The vainglorious old pooftah is dead!

Ghadaffi  killed a few days ago, torn apart by the mob, I reckon.  Leaves a touch of quease, even if there's no regret at his "passing".
An amusing comment here.  On the article by the always readable, provocative pamphleteer Mark Steyn.
"Just wondering, why did Colonel Ghaddafi never make General??

Ezra on "honour" murders

The excellent, eloquent, principled Ezra Levant, lets fly on the issue of Muslim murder of young women, aka "honour killings", which are increasing in Canada, and are getting a free pass!  Watch for the woman who is given no jail time for killing her daughter, because she's a Muslim.  Thanks to BCF.

This is really becoming quite an issue in the US, UK and Canada, and needs to be treated as the crime it is, not with some bogus and misguided "cultural sensitivity".

Can't embed the video, it's here at BCF.

US administration plants its head firmly in the sand and keeps it there

The statement below by a US Attorney-general has to be the most bone-headed, ignorant, silly, pusillanimous, pathetic, obsequious, disingenuous, snivelling, lying and plain dangerous that anyone in the Obama administration has uttered in a looong time.
It's in relation to what and who the US is fighting.  Don't forget they're in a war.  The statement  refuses to acknowledge the plainest facts of Islam that are explicit and crystal-clear in the doctrine and teachings of the faith.
Here it is, the statement by US attorney for Oregon Dwight Holton, about training of US law enforcement people in the ways of the terrorist.  Way to go, Dwight (not):
“I want to be perfectly clear about this: training materials that portray Islam as a religion of violence or with a tendency towards violence are wrong, they are offensive, and they are contrary to everything that this president, this attorney general and Department of Justice stands for,” Holton said Wednesday. “They will not be tol…