The Myth of the Moderate Muslim

[Seth]

Atrocity on atrocity in the name of Islam. Still no massive crowds of 'not in my name' types on the streets. Whilst Islamic leaders sort of say it where are the Muslamic crowds in support of civilized values? I posit they are not there because they don't exist. The reason the origin of the next atrocity can't be predicted is because they are all carrying a extreme agenda which is inherent in their religion, written out plainly in their Q'ranic scriptures. Hatred of the outsider and deceiving the Kufar and dividing the world into the house of war and the house of peace...everything in their medieval (war)book is what they are playing out in the real and modern world.

Yup.

[Seth]

There are 1.7 billion Muslims. If all, or even a great number of them were extremists and their supporters you'd be long dead now.

As for the lack of Muslim voices heard opposing the extremists, check this out for example:

Five things Australia's grand mufti may or may not have said about the Paris attacks

If the mainstream media report this sort of thing at all they do that in order to spin it into the opposite of what was actually said.

Didn't I provide you with a list of Muslim leaders who condemned Islamic terrorism before the Paris outrage was half a day old a few days ago, and you dismissed it as a bunch of liars?

I think it may be a good idea if you acquainted yourself with reality. That would make for a welcome change.

Well, you see, the problem is that words are cheap and Muslims are permitted, explicitly, to lie to infidels, including lying by omission, so what any Muslim says about another Muslim or terroristic actions by Muslims must be presumed to be a lie intended to advance the cause of Islam. This is why, until a substantial portion of those 1.7 billion Muslims rise up, form military units and go to war in the Mideast and exterminate utterly and completely the "radical Islam" elements that are engaging in terrorism and demonstrate through their behavior everywhere on earth that when ANY Muslim calls for or engages in jihad or other hostile action against non-muslims they as a group will themselves punish such radical elements, we are perfectly justified in apportioning blame to them and accusing them of doing exactly nothing to prevent such crimes and, in point of fact, accusing them of being silent co-conspirators in the criminal efforts to create a world-wide Islamic Caliphate, as called for in their holy book by their prophet himself.

And that is what we should and must do, and further we should be sequestering all Muslims and shipping them back to Saudi Arabia by C-130, dropping them by parachute (optional) into the middle of the Empty Quarter where they belong, regardless of nationality and regardless of their protestations of innocence or false claims of horror at what is explicitly called for by their holy book.

Until these Imams and all "peaceful" Muslims clean up their own mess, fuck 'em all, I won't trust a single one of them to be telling the truth about their beliefs or intentions, and with good reason not to.

Muslims are allowed to lie to unbelievers in order to defeat them. The two forms are:

Taqiyya - Saying something that isn't true.

Kitman - Lying by omission. An example would be when Muslim apologists quote only a fragment of verse 5:32 (that if anyone kills "it shall be as if he had killed all mankind") while neglecting to mention that the rest of the verse (and the next) mandate murder in undefined cases of "corruption" and "mischief."

Though not called Taqiyya by name, Muhammad clearly used deception when he signed a 10-year treaty with the Meccans that allowed him access to their city while he secretly prepared his own forces for a takeover. The unsuspecting residents were conquered in easy fashion after he broke the treaty two years later, and some of the people in the city who had trusted him at his word were executed.

Another example of lying is when Muhammad used deception to trick his personal enemies into letting down their guard and exposing themselves to slaughter by pretending to seek peace. This happened in the case of Ka'b bin al-Ashraf (as previously noted) and again later against Usayr ibn Zarim, a surviving leader of the Banu Nadir tribe, which had been evicted from their home in Medina by the Muslims.

At the time, Usayr ibn Zarim was attempting to gather an armed force against the Muslims from among a tribe allied with the Quraish (against which Muhammad had already declared war). Muhammad's "emissaries" went to ibn Zarim and persuaded him to leave his safe haven on the pretext of meeting with the prophet of Islam in Medina to discuss peace. Once vulnerable, the leader and his thirty companions were massacred by the Muslims with ease, belying the probability that they were mostly unarmed, having been given a guarantee of safe passage (Ibn Ishaq 981).

Such was the reputation of Muslims for lying and then killing that even those who "accepted Islam" did not feel entirely safe. The fate of the Jadhima is tragic evidence for this. When Muslim "missionaries" approached their tribe one of the members insisted that they would be slaughtered even though they had already "converted" to Islam to avoid just such a demise. However, the others were convinced that they could trust the Muslim leader's promise that they would not be harmed if they simply offered no resistance. (After convincing the skeptic to lay down his arms, the unarmed men of the tribe were quickly tied up and beheaded - Ibn Ishaq 834 & 837).

Today's Muslims often try to justify Muhammad's murder of poets and others who criticized him at Medina by saying that they broke a treaty by their actions. Yet, these same apologists place little value on treaties broken by Muslims. From Muhammad to Saddam Hussein, promises made to non-Muslim are distinctly non-binding in the Muslim mindset.

Leaders in the Arab world routinely say one thing to English-speaking audiences and then something entirely different to their own people in Arabic. Yassir Arafat was famous for telling Western newspapers about his desire for peace with Israel, then turning right around and whipping Palestinians into a hateful and violent frenzy against Jews.

The 9/11 hijackers practiced deception by going into bars and drinking alcohol, thus throwing off potential suspicion that they were fundamentalists plotting jihad. This effort worked so well, in fact, that even weeks after 9/11, John Walsh, the host of a popular American television show, said that their bar trips were evidence of 'hypocrisy.'

The transmission from Flight 93 records the hijackers telling their doomed passengers that there is "a bomb on board" but that everyone will "be safe" as long as "their demands are met." Obviously none of these things were true, but these men, who were so intensely devoted to Islam that they were willing to "slay and be slain for the cause of Allah" (as the Qur'an puts it) saw nothing wrong with employing Taqiyya in order to facilitate their mission of mass murder.

The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) insists that it "has not now or ever been involved with the Muslim Brotherhood, or supported any covert, illegal, or terrorist activity or organization." In fact, it was created by the Muslim Brotherhood and has bankrolled Hamas. At least nine founders or board members of ISNA have been accused by prosecutors of supporting terrorism.

Prior to engineering several deadly terror plots, such as the Fort Hood massacre and the attempt to blow up a Detroit-bound airliner, American cleric Anwar al-Awlaki was regularly sought out by NPR, PBS and even government leaders to expound on the peaceful nature of Islam.

The Quran says in several places that Allah is the best at deceiving people. An interesting side note is verse 7:99, which says that the only people who feel secure from Allah are actually those who will perish in Hell. Taken literally, this would mean that those Muslims who arrogantly assume that they will enter heaven are in for a rude surprise (such are the hazards of worshipping an all-powerful deceiver).

The near absence of Qur'anic verse and reliable Hadith that encourage truthfulness is somewhat surprising, given that many Muslims are convinced that their religion teaches honesty. In fact, it is because of this ingrained belief that many Muslims are quite honest. When lying is addressed in the Qur'an, it is nearly always in reference to the "lies against Allah" - referring to the Jews and Christians who rejected Muhammad's claim to being a prophet.

Finally, the circumstances by which Muhammad allowed a believer to lie to a non-spouse are limited to those that either advance the cause of Islam or enable a Muslim to avoid harm to his well-being (and presumably that of other Muslims as well). Although this should be kept very much in mind when dealing with matters of global security, such as Iran's nuclear intentions, it is not grounds for assuming that the Muslim one might personally encounter on the street or in the workplace is any less honest than anyone else.

Additional Reading: Taqiyya about Taqiyya (Raymond Ibrahim)
Source

[Seth]

Leaders, who have read the Koran well and know all about Taqiyya, condemn

Changed your tune about "lip service" now?

it isn't grass-roots condemnation despite there being 1.7billion of them.

Again: If all, or even a great number of them were extremists and their supporters you'd be long dead now.

Being an "extremist" willing to go to war or wear a suicide vest is a level of belief much higher than being an ordinary Muslim, but that does not demonstrate that all Muslims do not secretly support jihad and are merely lying about their feelings, either directly or simply by omission, about jihad as they secretly rejoice in jihad and the coming of the Caliphate and the deaths of unbelievers.

They are commanded by the Koran to lie to infidels, which includes lying by omission, which is to say remaining silent and inactive in eliminating the scourge of Islamic jihad, or even silently supporting it both in spirit and in fact by not outing radicals in their own mosques and communities.

Muslims are all liars when it comes to them telling us the truth...until they prove otherwise by putting their lives where their mouths are by doing everything possible to whip the radicals out from among them and subject them to international justice and sanction.

[Seth]

Leaders, who have read the Koran well and know all about Taqiyya, condemn

Changed your tune about "lip service" now?

it isn't grass-roots condemnation despite there being 1.7billion of them.

Again: If all, or even a great number of them were extremists and their supporters you'd be long dead now.

In the fullness of time I am long dead. You look at these things in a very naive way. Not being moderates isn't the same as being die-hard extremists - consider evangelical Xians for instance?

Haven't seen a "Xian" terrorist movement of any substantial nature lately, and those that have emerged in the US have been taken down with the assistance of everyone else, including Christians, who eschew violence in the name of their god.

If you're a Muslim who is not outing Muslim radicals and their plans to the authorities, then you're a conspirator and just as guilty as the terrorists are. Silence and lip-service are no longer acceptable. You are either with civilized society or you are with Muslim terrorists. Pick a side because there is no longer a middle ground that allows anyone to simply ignore what's happening.

Just like WWII, you're either a Nazi, Nazi sympathizer, or you're not. End of story.

[JimC]

Seth wrote:

so what any Muslim says about another Muslim or terroristic actions by Muslims must be presumed to be a lie intended to advance the cause of Islam.

Yet another example of absolutist nonsense. It will be true in some cases, false in most cases.

[Blind groper]

I was in Egypt in September. I was talking to an educated Arab, who was (of course) Muslim. I asked him about ISIS.

He told me that if any ISIS member dared to identify himself as ISIS and stick his head into Egypt, it would be removed at the neck. If not by the military, then by any and every average Egyptian who might be nearby.

In spite of the prejudice shown by ignorant and idiotic people against Muslims, most of them are simply ordinary people who want to get on with their lives, look after their families, make a good life for themselves, and have not the slightest interest in harming others.

[Seth]

Seth wrote:

so what any Muslim says about another Muslim or terroristic actions by Muslims must be presumed to be a lie intended to advance the cause of Islam.

Yet another example of absolutist nonsense. It will be true in some cases, false in most cases.

Well, when members of a religious group are told that to be a member they must lie to infidels, I think any other presumption is extremely dangerous to civilization.

So, until Muslims as a whole give up these pretensions to rulership based on their holy book, we are well served by assuming that everything they say to us is a lie. At least that way we won't fall into the trap of accommodating them to our disadvantage, which is exactly what all of Europe is discovering, to its horror, right this very minute.

Did one swinging dick of a Muslim rat out even one of those terrorists hiding among them as they flooded Europe? Not that I've heard of.

[Seth]

I was in Egypt in September. I was talking to an educated Arab, who was (of course) Muslim. I asked him about ISIS.

He told me that if any ISIS member dared to identify himself as ISIS and stick his head into Egypt, it would be removed at the neck. If not by the military, then by any and every average Egyptian who might be nearby.

Well, being a Muslim, he's commanded to lie to your face by his prophet, so why would you believe him? Has HE cut off any Muslim terrorist's heads lately? How come we haven't seen street Egyptians cutting off terrorist heads? We see them tossing gay people from roofs and killing each other, but not one terrorist I can identify has been so much as outed, much less had his head cut off by a mob of average Egyptians.

In spite of the prejudice shown by ignorant and idiotic people against Muslims, most of them are simply ordinary people who want to get on with their lives, look after their families, make a good life for themselves, and have not the slightest interest in harming others...

...who share their faith. Everybody else, of course, can be enslaved or killed without a second thought, so says their Imams, their prophet and their god.

[JimC]

Seth wrote:

so what any Muslim says about another Muslim or terroristic actions by Muslims must be presumed to be a lie intended to advance the cause of Islam.

Yet another example of absolutist nonsense. It will be true in some cases, false in most cases.

Well, when members of a religious group are told that to be a member they must lie to infidels, I think any other presumption is extremely dangerous to civilization.

So, until Muslims as a whole give up these pretensions to rulership based on their holy book, we are well served by assuming that everything they say to us is a lie. At least that way we won't fall into the trap of accommodating them to our disadvantage, which is exactly what all of Europe is discovering, to its horror, right this very minute.

Did one swinging dick of a Muslim rat out even one of those terrorists hiding among them as they flooded Europe? Not that I've heard of.

I've said in other threads that the mainstream muslim population in Europe (and Oz for that matter) could do more. If they want to avoid a nasty backlash, they could do worse than arrange a few well-publicised events where the capture of a terrorist group by the authorities is directly down to information passed on by other muslims.

And what you say about their pretensions about their holy book can also apply to christians, at least the believers in the literal truth of everything in the bible. It might not have as much exhortation to use the sword on non-believers as the koran, but it has plenty of nasty bits as well. In reality, much of the islamic population quietly ignores the wilder parts of the koran, just as most mainstream christians no longer think that bears should eat little children who disrespect prophets...

[Blind groper]

Good points, Jim.

Christians have in the past been as bad or worse than Muslims. In fact, a good part of the hostility of Muslim extremists to the west is related to Christian atrocities against Muslims.

[Seth]

Good points, Jim.

Christians have in the past been as bad or worse than Muslims. In fact, a good part of the hostility of Muslim extremists to the west is related to Christian atrocities against Muslims.

Wayback Machine fallacy. What happened 1500 years ago has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on what radical Muslims do today. It's just an excuse that Christian-haters trot out to try and justify the evil that is Islam.

[cronus]

Man with delusion 'a' beats man with delusion 'b' and sometime later man with delusion 'b' beats man with delusion 'a'. You can see how this can carry on a long time? Hundreds if not thousands of years....?

[Seth]

Man with delusion 'a' beats man with delusion 'b' and sometime later man with delusion 'b' beats man with delusion 'a'. You can see how this can carry on a long time? Hundreds if not thousands of years....?

I do not subscribe to the "ancestral guilt" argument that attempts to lay blame for acts done hundreds or thousands of years ago by other people at the feet of people today who have done no such thing, much less laying blame on an entire ethnic or religious group for supposed wrongs done long ago to some other ethnic or religious group. I reject such arguments absolutely as irrational and deliberately false attempts to perpetuate and justify wrongdoing by people of today who have themselves never been harmed by those they accuse of harming them.

[cronus]

The ideas are ancestral Seth. Things always play out in real time. You are a astute observer of life to spot this. I'll cure you of your shallow, organised religion yet....and set another slave free.

[Seth]

The ideas are ancestral Seth. Things always play out in real time. You are a astute observer of life to spot this. I'll cure you of your shallow, organised religion yet....and set another slave free.

Well, since I don't subscribe to any organized theistic religion, you'll have a tough row to hoe.

My religion is Tolerism™, which is in my case, non-theistic.