[Another in a series of “worth reposting” screeds from days of yore ;-)]
Charles Brumbelow, in an email published in Jerry Pournelle’s Chaos Maor Mail points to an Opinion Journal (WSJ) snippet listed under, “The Religion That Dare Not Speak Its Name,” that touches on a subject that’s too difficult for “nuanced” thinkers to resolve easily, but which seems pretty darned simple to me:
There is a genuine problem here of choosing language that distinguishes between Muslim terrorists and plain old Muslims. But circumlocutions designed to avoid acknowledging the former’s Islamic nature cannot possibly help clarify matters.
Let me help “clarify matters” a bit.
“Plain old Muslims” claim the Koran (choose your own trendy spelling) is their literal guide to a holy life.
Islamic terrorists claim the Koran (choose your own trendy spelling) is their literal guide to a holy life.
“Plain old Muslims” revere Mohammed and view his life and teachings (of which the Koran, Hadith, etc,) as worthy of emulation in all of life.
Islamic terrorists revere Mohammed and view his life and teachings (of which the Koran, Hadith, etc,) as worthy of emulation in all of life.
Now, THE distinction: Islamic terrorists honestly, forthrightly and openly seek to actually emulate the bloody Butcher of Medina, while “Plain old Muslims” are either just not all that serious about actually following Mohammed or are living lives of lies, decieving the Dar al Harb.
There. Now you know the single most significant difference between “Plain old Muslims” and Islamic terrorists.
THIS is an open trackbacks post. Link to THIS post and track back. 🙂
If you have a linkfest/open trackback post to promote OR if you simply want to promote a post via the linkfests/open trackback posts others are offering, GO TO LINKFEST HAVEN DELUXE! Just CLICK the link above or the graphic immediately below.
