Mark G's got a point

Submitted by jennifer solis (United States), Feb 25, 2008 at 23:12

So-called "radical" Islam is actually practicing some of the FUNDAMENTALS of Islam, based on original teachings of Muhammed, and therefore they are FUNDAMENTALISTS.

The word "radical" is defined as favoring basic change, in this case within Islam, and therefore can be applied to Muslems that gradually forgo tenets of Islam. Like deciding dogs aren't filthy and forbidden by god, and killing the infidel doesn't get you into Paradise. The only argument I can think of is that people use the term "radical" Islam because they are trying to rationalize that groups in Islam wish to impose "basic change" on democratic societies. But that does not address the FUNDAMENTALIST point of view, position these Muslims are comming from.

I've wondered about the terminology before - I think the mistake, if there is one, could possibly be attributed to the West's misguided attempt to compare Islam to themselves, as if a group of working-class folks decided to suddenly start wearing suicide vests and were blowing themselves up when the boss fires them or refuses a raise. That would be a "radical" act on their part. It would not be the norm in our society, and there are no accepted doctrines to support it.

There are DOCTRINES in Islam that support suicide bombs, martyrdome. Killing the unbeliever. So these guys are following some of the FUNDAMENTALS of Islam. Therefore I think it has to with the West's somewhat ostrich approach as to what Islam truly represents.

9-11 was "radical" only to our sensabilities. It was celebrated in many parts of the Muslim world.

In my book, if Muslims were to, throughout the world, start speaking out AGAINST the U.S.S. Cole, multple embassy bombings, genocide in Darfur, suicide bomings taking out school buses and sidewalk cafes in Israel, incredibly, unspeakably inhumane treatment of women in Muslim countries, as well as 9-11 and the London bombings - THAT would be an example of a "radical" Islam.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".