Another much needed corrective to the discussion on Islam. Tim Furnish is simply one of the best, and by far the wittiest, experts on Islam writing today. You can order his books and follow his blog through these links:
"Radical” Islam: Livin’ on the Edge, or Stuck Squarely in the Middle, of the Religion?
by Timothy R. Furnish, PhD, Three Kraters Media, Nov 12, 2018:
When I was doing a doctorate in Islamic history at Ohio State University back in the 1990s, the study of the world’s second-largest religion and the civilization it spawned was still mostly an academic exercise, as it had been for most of the 20th century. But with the explosion of Islamic terrorism since then—and it is Islamic, because 76% (51/67) of the groups on the US State Department foreign terrorist organizations list are Muslim—matters once merely the province of professors are now crucial for policymakers.
And in that realm, most in the US are, if not blind—at best monocular. Since 9/11 this country has had three Presidential administrations. The operating premise in both the Bush and Obama presidencies was that Islam is peaceful, and that jihad contravenes Muhammad’s teachings. But whereas Bush administration apologetics for Allah’s acolytes were passive, those in Obama’s were more actively supportive: the President himself famously said that “the future does not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam;” and his CIA director bloviated that jihad is a “holy struggle…meaning to purify oneself or one’s community” and has nothing to do with killing. (As for the Trump approach—that shall be examined below.)
Of course, as one can ascertain from actually reading the Qur’an, relevant Hadiths (alleged sayings of Muhammad’s), or even a modicum of Islamic history—and to paraphrase my old Army Drill Instructor, SFC Ocaña, “it don’t take a PhD” to do so—jihad’s primary meaning is exactly violence against non-Muslims to bring them to heel.
 |
| There is absolutely NOTHING “radical” or “extremist” about this flag, even though ISIS and similar groups use it. The flag says “there is no deity but Allah, and Muhammad is his messenger.” That’s the credo of 1.6 billion Muslims. |
When I was doing a doctorate in Islamic history at Ohio State University back in the 1990s, the study of the world’s second-largest religion and the civilization it spawned was still mostly an academic exercise, as it had been for most of the 20th century. But with the explosion of Islamic terrorism since then—and it is Islamic, because 76% (51/67) of the groups on the US State Department foreign terrorist organizations list are Muslim—matters once merely the province of professors are now crucial for policymakers.
And in that realm, most in the US are, if not blind—at best monocular. Since 9/11 this country has had three Presidential administrations. The operating premise in both the Bush and Obama presidencies was that Islam is peaceful, and that jihad contravenes Muhammad’s teachings. But whereas Bush administration apologetics for Allah’s acolytes were passive, those in Obama’s were more actively supportive: the President himself famously said that “the future does not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam;” and his CIA director bloviated that jihad is a “holy struggle…meaning to purify oneself or one’s community” and has nothing to do with killing. (As for the Trump approach—that shall be examined below.)
Of course, as one can ascertain from actually reading the Qur’an, relevant Hadiths (alleged sayings of Muhammad’s), or even a modicum of Islamic history—and to paraphrase my old Army Drill Instructor, SFC Ocaña, “it don’t take a PhD” to do so—jihad’s primary meaning is exactly violence against non-Muslims to bring them to heel.
