Islam's voice of hatred, war & insanity

Submitted by Marc J. Rauch (United States), Sep 3, 2002 at 12:15

We've all heard the continuing harangue that Islam is a religion of peace and love, that despite what we've witnessed and continue to see all around us, Islam and its followers are only victims of misunderstanding. It's just the "radical element," we've been told, that are trying to expropriate Muhammad's venerable doctrines, and to corrupt an otherwise beautiful theology.

Well, to dispel all notions of the purported peace, love and beauty of Islam, I give you ISLAMIC VOICE, a twenty-year old print (and now also online) publication that professes pragmatism and objectivity in addressing Islamic issues. The ISLAMIC VOICE "does not believe in being controversial, sensational, grievance-minded or simply a spokesman of the community," so they state. Within their mandate of providing realistic, and matter-of-fact reporting, one of their stated goals is to combat malicious propaganda directed against Islam and Muslims.

Here's how they handle their lofty mission: In response to the September 11th attacks against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, ISLAMIC VOICE presents a feature review of the book "L'Effroyable Imposture" (The Horrible Fraud). Written by French author Thierry Meyssan, this work "dismisses the whole episode as ‘a loony fable' patched together by the White House and the U.S. Department of Defense." In short, Meyssan claims that Muslim extremists did not hijack the jets that crashed into the buildings, but that the airplanes were empty, pilot-less drones directed by remote control (by U.S. agents) from the ground. This story was published in the July 2002 edition of ISLAMIC VOICE. Considering that we have admissions of guilt by Osama bin Laden and his people, as well as the acknowledgement of Islamic leaders such as Hosni Mubarak that bin Laden and al-Qaeda were responsible for the acts, the use of this story to defend Islam is unconscionable. There is nothing pragmatic or objective about it. It merely fuels the fires of hatred for the West within the Islamic community.

In a discussion about dietary laws, their expert, Dr. Zakir Naik, blames the frequent "American practice of wife-swapping" on eating pork. He concludes that this activity is becoming rampant within the pig-eating (Hindu) community in Bombay. There's nothing controversial, sensational, or grievance-minded about this bit of scientific drivel, is there? Nah, that's just the kind of tolerant understanding that Muslim's have for their non-Islamic brothers. It's similar to their libelous claims that Jews kill Gentile children to drink their blood during religious ceremonies. Gosh, you don't think that Dr. Zakir could be a faker, do you?

ISLAMIC VOICE also provides oodles of other near-hilarious reports, such as the one about Muhammar al-Qaddafi (the Libyan terrorist/leader/dictator) hosting peace talks between India and Pakistan. Just think, one of the world's most notorious murderers hosting a peace powwow under his tent: the wolf inviting a lamb for dinner; and the lamb is the dinner.

However, most revealing, and reviling of all is the link that ISLAMIC VOICE provides to something called "A Brief Chronology of Muslim History." The chronology breaks down Muslim history century by century, from the 6th through the 20th. In such a chronology, one might expect to find numerous references to wondrous achievements, scientific discoveries, literary and artistic accomplishments, and events that would distinguish Muslims as humanitarians or enlightened leaders of a true faith.

No, not at all, it's an incredibly extensive list of all the wars, destruction, violence, and murder that Muslims have engaged in for about 1,500 years.

Now, I'm the first to admit that other religious and ethnic groups have committed or participated in horrible infamy during their respective histories, but I can't imagine a circumstance in which any other major group would only highlight violence as their primary contribution to world society. Particularly so in a "brief chronology," where there might be the attempt to portray only positive aspects. A chronology of Christian history might include the Crusades and Inquisition, but they would probably also list the founding of cities, universities, scientific advancements, artistic creations, and so on. I can conceive of two exceptions to this gross oversight: First, a chronological history of STAR TREK's Klingons would only list wars, battles, and destruction. Second, if persons wishing to defame Islam created the chronology.

However, this chronology is part of a Muslim produced website that is hosted by USC (yes, USC, as in University of Southern California). The website is the "Islamic Server of MSA-USC." Their mission statement is "This evolving server provides information about the fundamentals of Islam and other aspects which make this religion a universal way of life. We here at MSA-USC pray that Allah finds the information contained in this site pleasing to Him. We also hope that you find the information useful to you. Please make a du'aa for those people who have graciously contributed content to the site: may Allah reward them mightily."

So here we have a website paid for and supported, at least in part, by one of our country's leading educational institutions, that declares its most important accomplishments as being the death and subjugation of non-Muslims. And they pray that Allah finds this pleasing...

Bibliography:

http://www.islamicvoice.com/
http://www.islamicvoice.com/july.2002\news.htm#adid
http://www.islamicvoice.com/february.99/zakir.htm
http://www.islamicvoice.com/july.2002\community.htm#qhp
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/history/chronology/index.html

---

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".